MAllAR;\JA KUMAR SOMENDRA CHAND NANDY v. THE STATE OF l1'ITAR PRADESH JULY 10, 1985 [V. BALAKRISHNA ERADI AND SABYASACHI MUK!IARJI, JJ • J Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act 1950 ss. 4 & 6 – Jagirdari rights – Grant of – Whether fall outside the purview of the Act – Worship of deity – Entrustment of right – Whether provision for -payment of compensation to be made• A Jagir of 41 villages was conferred on Dewan Krishna Kant Nandy, the predecessor-in-interest of the appellant by the Raja of. Banaras. By .a fresh Sanad
issued on January 10, ·1785 the Governor-G>neral assigned the said villages as 'Altamga Jagir ', c for the purposes of defraying the expenses of worship etc. of the deity in a temple. Subsequently, in the ·year 1793, the grantee created a trust of the income of this Jagir in favour of the deity. In the revenue settlement of 1841 the grantee was entered as Jagirdar of these villages entitled to reaUse the land re- venue and the zamindars were· to -pay the annual land revenue to the Jagirdar, and since then the grantee and his descendants have been realising the land revenue. In execution of the decrees in the suits which were· filed against the defaulting zamindars, the appellant's ancestors purchased t.he zamindari rights.
When the U.P. Zamindari and Land Reforms· Act, 1950 came into force i!l 1952, the appellant claimed to have two distinct rights, namely, Jagirdari rights under the Sanad and additional Zamindari rights acquired by purchase in exeeution of the
decrees. The appellant was, however, paid compensation in the form of annuity in respect of those villages over which he had acquired zamindari rights as the land was held in trust for meeting ,the expenses of a religious institution •. The State's claim that the Jagirdari rights of the appellant became vested in the State under ss. 4 and 6 of the Act, was
disputed by the appellant contending that his Jagirdari rights fell outside the purview of the Act and had not vested in the State. The appellant filed a writ petition in the High Court
alleging that he had not been paid compensation in resP.,ct of Jagirdari rights and sought direction to the Governme.nt to recognize and enforce the Jagirdari rights over the said
villages. The petition was dismissed and this order was confirmed by a Division Bench. Dismissing the Appeal to this Court, HELD: · 1. The intention of the LegiSlature as clearly disclosed by the Scheme of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 was to extinguish estates, all
derivative rights in estates and interest of intermediaries between the State and the tiller of the soil. All grants and confirmation of title in respect of a right or privilege over land in an estate or its .revenue, would stand automatically determined under the provisions of the Act. [118 G-H]
State of Uttar Pradesh v. Kumlar Sri Trivikrma Narain Singh, [1962] 3 S.C.R. 213 followed. 2. In the instant case, the appellant was having Jagirdari rights over 41 villages under the Sansd issued in January 1785, and the interest of the appellant in the land constituted an estate under Cl. (8) s. 3 of the Act read with Cl. (26) of that section. As a result of the combined operation of ss. 4 and 6 of the Act, the Jagirdarl. rights on the date of the coming into force of the Act automatically ceased and became vested in the State free from encumbrances with effect from the specified date. [119 D-11, 120 A]
3. The Sansd expressly states that the grantee shall take and use the produce of the original lands and increase thereof .without being liable to pay any Dewani contributions and govern- ment demands. [119 CJ
4. The appellant and his predecessors were entitled to take possession and hold control over the lands. The application for grant of the Sansd clearly shows that the request was for conf ir- mation of the grant of 41 mouzas of land and for the issue of a Sanad evidencing such confirmation. [119 D]
(Per.,Sabyasachi lkil<harji J. coDCUrring) In the instant case, there is no provision for any compensation for vesting of the right of entrustment of certain duties of worship which belonged to the donee. The Act has not been challenged on the ground as being ultra vires and though it is not necessary to provide for compensation in 811 cases after s.c.NANDY v. STATE [BALAKRISllNA ERADI, J.]
the amendment of the Constitution, this is a factor which normally should be taken into consideration because taking away of a right without some provision for compensation is normally not favoured unless one is compelled by the language of the provision. No provision has been made for this obligation of worship i.e. whether the worship, would no longer be continued or whether the State would carry on the worship. In the social background this is a
factor which normally deters one from interpreting a document in a manner which haa abolished worship of the deity. [121 E-G] CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. 2239 (N) of
1970. c From the Judgment and Order dated 22.3.1966 of the Allaha- bad High Court in Special Appeal No. 647 of 1961. D.N. Mukharjee and Ranjan Mukharjee for the Appellant. s.c. Manchanda and Mrs. S.Dixit for the Respondent.
The following Judgments w~re delivered : BALAKRISHNA ERADI, J. · This is an appeal by specia1 leave aga!nst a judgment of a Di vision Bench of the Allahabad High Court dated March 22,
966 dismissing Special Appeal No. 647 of 1961 and confirming the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the said High Court rejecting Civil Misc. Writ No. 809 of 1958 filed by the appellant herein.
The appellant claims to be the descendant and successor-in- interest of one Dewan Krishna Kant Nandy in whose favour a jagir of 41 villages situated in the district of Ballfa had been conferred by Raja Mahip Narayan Singh of Banaras.
This jagir grant was recognised by the East India Company and in token thereof the Governor General> by a fresh Sanad dated January 10, 1785 assigned the said 41 villagea as 'Altamga J2,gir' in favour of De'1an Krishna Kant Nandy.
The Sanad mentioned that the grant was being made for purposes of defraying the expenses of worship etc. of the deity in a temple. Subsequently, by a document of the year 1793, Dewan Krishna Kant Nandy created a trust of the income of this jagir in favour of the deity. ·In the revenue settlement of 1841, Dewan Krishna Kant Nandy was entered as Jagirdar of these villages entitled to realise the land revenue and the zamindars of the villages were charged with the duty of paying the annual land r.evenue aggregating to Rs. 10, 000 to the Jagirdar.
It is the case of the appellant that since 1785, Dewan Krishna Kant Nandy and his descendants have throughout been realising the land revenue of the said villages. When some of the zam.indars defaulted in payment of the
land revenue, suits for realisation of the outstanding arrears were filed against them and in execution of the decrees obtained in those suits the appellant's ancestors purchased the zamindari rights of the. defaulting zamindars in respect of some of the villages. Thus, at the time -when the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (U.P. Act No. l of 1951) – hereinafter called tthe Act' – came into force in 1952, the appellant claims to have held two distinct rights namely, jagirdari rights in respect of c
villages covered by the Sanad and additional zamindari rigilts in respect of the some of the villages acquired by purchase in execution of the decrees. When the provisions of the Ac't: were brought
into force, the appellant was paid compensation in the form of annuity in respect of those villag1::s over which he had acquired zamindari rights since the lands were held in trust for reeeting the expen- _ses of a religious institution. The State of Uttar P·radesh claimed that the Jagirdari rights of the appellant became vested in the State under sections 4 and 6 o( the Act.
But this claim was disputed by the appellant who cont<;!nded that his Jagirdari rights fell outside the purview of the Act and had not vested in the Stafe. It was for resolving the said dispute that the
appellant approached the High r.ourt with the Writ Petition com- plaining that he had not been paid compensation in respect of his Jagirdari rights over 41 villages and praying that a writ should be issued compeling the Government to recognise and enforce the Jagirdari rights of the appellant over the said villages.
The Writ Petition was dismissed by the learned Single Judge, whose judgment, as already noticed was confirmed by a Division Bench of the High Court on appeal. From the facts narrated above, it is clear that the appel- lant was having Jagirdari rights over 41 villages under the Sanad issued to him in January, 1785.
As pointed out by this Court in State of Uttar Pradesh v. Kunwar Sri Trivikram Narain Singh [1962] 3 s.c.R. 213, the intention of the legislature as clearly disclosed by the Scheme of the Act was to extinguish estates and all deriVative rights in estates and to extinguish the interest of intermediaries between the State and the tiller of the soil. All grants and confirmation of title in respect of a right or privilege over land in an estate or its revenue, will stand automatically determined under the provisions of the Act • s.c.NANDY v. STATE [BALAKRISHNA ERADI, J.]
The High Court has rightly negatived the contention of the appellant that the right conferred on him by the Sanad was in the nature of a right to pension amounting to a sum of Rs• 10,000.
We have gone through the terms of the Sanad, which is available at page l3 of the paper book. It clearly shows that what was granted to the appellant and his predecessors was a jagir right in respect' of the lands comprised in 41 villages entitling the grantee to collect and
realise the land revenue due from the zamindars aggregating to Rs. 10,000 with possible future increases and utilise the same for 'defraying the expense of the worship of the Thakoor'. The Sanad expressly states that the grantee shall take and use the produce of the original lands and increase thereof without being liable to pay any Dewani con- tributions and Government demands. The appellant and his prede- cessors were entitled to take possession and hold control over the lands. The application made by the appellant, his prede- cessor, Dewan Krishna Kant Nandy for the grant of the Sanad is at page 15 of the paper book,
That clearly shows that the request was for confirmation of the grant of 41 mouzas of land and for the issue of a Sanad 'evidencing such confirmation. Under the grant, the appellant and his predecessors acquired interest in the land and this interest in the hands of the appellant clearly constitutes an Estate as defined in clause (8) of section 3 of the Act read alo1J8 with clause (26) of the same section.
Section 4 of the Act provides that as from a date to be specified, all estates situate in ·uttar Pradesh shall vest in the State free from all encumbrances. Section 6 lays down the consequences of the vesting of an estate in the State.
Under clause (a) thereof, all ·rights, title and interest of all the intermediaries in every estate automatically cease and become vested in the State of Uttar Pradesh free from all encumbrances. Clause (b) of the said section, which deals with grants and con- firmations of title is in the following terms :-
"All grants and confirmation of title of or to land in any estate so acquired, or of or to , any right or privilege in respect of such land or its land revenue shall, whether liable to resumption or not, deter-
mine". There cannot be any doubt that as a result of the combined opera- tion of sections 4 and 6 of the Act, the Jagirdari rights, which the appellant originally possessed over the 41 villages as on the date of the coming.into force of the Act automatically cease and ll
c became vested in the State of Uttar Pradesh free from all encw:n- brances with effect from the specified date. Such being the position, the High Court was perfectly right in holding that the appellant was not entitled to any of the reliefs in the Writ Petition.
This appeal accordingly fails and is dismissed but in the circumstances without any order as to costs. SAi!YASAGHI MIJKHARJI, J. The facts of this case and the position in' law have been discussed by my learned brother. The only doubt that I have entertained about this matter is whether the Sanad or the grant dated 10th of January, l 7ti5 created any interest in .the don~e, Dewan Krishna Kanta Nandy, the predecessor in interest of the present appellant as contemplated under Section 3 and Section 6 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951). The document is at page 13 of the Paper Book in this Court and the material portion of which is as follows:-
"To the present and future Mutsuddies of the affairs of Government and Zamindars and Chowdharies and Kanongoes and Mokudduns and Tenants and Cultivators of pergunnah Gazipore purchased by Government situate in
Dooha Allahabad be it known that Jageer Mouzas to the 8.mount of Ten thousand Rupees are at present settled upon Dewan Krishna Kant Nandy by way of an Altumga Donation to enable him to defray the expense of the
worship of the Thakoor from the commencement of the Autumn season in Aodiyal 1189 one thousand one hundred and eighty nine Fasly according to the Zamin so that he may take possession thereof and hold control over
same and he and his descendents apply the produce thereof and defray the necessary expanses of the Wor- ship of the Thakoor. It behove th that you consider that aforesaid Original Mouzas and increase thereof to
be free and exempt from being liable to charge and alteration as well ~s from all the Dewanny contri~u tions and Government demands and not deviate from his advise for the welfare of the tenants and inhabitants
a:xi.d the cultivation of the land nor require a new Sanad every year the conduct that the abovenamed ls to observe is this that he shall take and use the produce of the original lands and increase thereof he
and his descendants without participation or parter …. S.C. NANDY v. STATE (SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, J.] and pray for the welfare of Government and continue the tenants and inhabitants pleased and thankful by
adopting salutary·measures and exert himself stre- nuously for the increase of cultivation and augmenta- tion of duties and exercise.no apprehension or injus- tice towards the inhabitants of that place· by any
means and take care of the public roads that passen- gers may pass and repass in full confidence and suffer no body to commit any prohibited act or drWlkenness and ref rain from levyir.g any of the Branches of
Revenue that have been discontinued." ls it entrustment of certain duties of worship of Thakoor and for this purpose providing for some expenses which will be met from the land indicated in the document or is it a grant of the interest in the land coupled with the obligation to perform the duty of worship to the Deity? Having regard to the expres- sions used in the document to
which my learned brother has referred and having regard to the fact that incidental powers of managing etc. as contained in the said document as set out here- inbefore, the view taken by my learned brother seems.to be appro- priate though two facts have caused me certain anxiety namely that there is no provision for any· compensation for vesting of this right of property which belonged to the donee.
I say this for this reason that though the Act has not been challenged on this' ground as being ultra_ vires and though it is not necessary to provide for compensation in all cases after the amendment of the Constitution, this is, in my opinion, a factor which normally should be taken into consideration because taking away of right without some provision for compensation is normally not favoured unless on~ is so compelled by the language of the provision. The other factor which has caused me some hesitation is that for thi& obligation of worship, no provision has been made i.e. whether the worship would no longer be continued or whether the State would carry on the worship.
In our social background, this is also a factor which normally deters one from interpreting a docu- ment in a manner which has abolished worship of deity. But in spite of these doubts, in view of· the language used in the docu- ment itself, I respectfully, though with certain amount of hesitation, agree with the view taken by my learned brother. A.P.J.
Appeal dismissed.