EXTRACT FROM MUZRAI MANUAL
CONVERSION OF LAND INAMS INTO CASH GRANTS
(1) The question of converting all land inams into cash was proposed for consideration at the meeting of Deputy Commissioners and Heads of De-partments held in October 1926. As the subject was of considerable impor-tance, the Officers concerned were requested to examine it in detail with reference to the conditions in the several districts and forward their opin-ion. The majority of the Deputy Commissioners considered such conversion undesirable. The Muzrai Commissioner was of opinion that such conver¬sion should not, as a general rule, be permitted, but might be considered in particular cases where the circumstances make it desirable. The Superinten-dent, Revenue Survey and Settlement in Mysore, held that the measure is neither feasible nor desirable and that, if undertaken; may involve addi-tional expenditure to be borne by Government. (Notification NO. 1252-3—Muz. 179-26-4, dated 2nd February, 1928)
(2) Government agree that as a general measure, conversion of land inams into cash grants is not likely to be altogether beneficial either to Government or to the institutions concerned. It will not be easy to fix, as a general arrangement, the cash grants to be allowed in lieu of the inam lands resumed. Cash grants would be fixed for all time while the institutions if left in the enjoyment of land inarns, might expect to cover increase of ex-penditure from enhanced prices of produce or larger rents. Sentiment is also involved in the consideration of the question and the measure is not also likely to be popular. In view of these facts, the idea of making any innovation in the existing system will be abandoned.
(3) Where, however, in the circumstances of particular cases, the replace-ment of land inams by cash grants is considered desirable, the conversion may, as suggested by the Muzrai Commissioner, be proposed and cases of this kind submitted for the orders of Government.
(4) The Muzrai Commissioner in Mysore suggests also that the present rule fixing the period of lease of temple inam lands at five years and in special cases at ten years may be relaxed in cases in which it is found that leasing for longer period will fetch higher rent as in the case of garden lands in the malnad. This suggestion is approved. Cases in which the pe¬riod of lease exceeds ten years may be submitted for orders of Government, those for periods upto ten years being sanctioned by the Muzrai Commis¬sioner.
CONVERSION OF BHATT INAM LANDS INTO DEVADAYA
Government are pleased to sanction the conversion into Devadaya of the Bhatt inam lands in Bidargere and other villages in the Anekal Taluk en-dowed by Mr. G. Venkataramaniah, for the benefit of Sri Kodandaramaswami Temple, the present Jodi and quit-rent, etc., being treated as Jodi, as the conversion will not result in any loss of revenue to Government and as the permanency of temple service will be secured. (Notification No. 1524-7—Muz. 166-25-8, dated 31st May, 1926)
RESUMPTION OF INAM LAND NOT FIT FOR AGRICULTURAL PURPOSES
As the inam land originally granted to Sri Guruvannadevara Mutt of Hanumanthapura Village, Bangalore Taluk, as agricultural land cannot be used for agricultural purposes according to the intention of the endowment, Government direct that it may be resumed and an equal extent of similar land given to the Mutt on the conditions of the old grant. The new land to be given in exchange may, if possible, be in the same Taluk, if not in the Same Hobli. (Notification No. 183-6— Muz. 273-27-7, dated 24th July,1928.
PERIOD WITHIN WHICH APPEAL TO GOVERNMENT UNDER RULE XXII OF THE INAM RULES SHOULD BE PREFERRED
After a settlement has been made by the Inam Commissioner, the proper course for the party affected by it is to appeal to Government under Rule XXII of the Inam Rules. Though they do' not provide any specific period within which appeals should be preferred against the order of the Inam Commissioner, it is to be understood that such appeals should be preferred within a reasonable time, in fixing which the provisions of the ordinary law of limitation will serve as a usefulguide. Government consider that appeals long after the original settlement should not be encouraged specially when there are no adequate grounds for condoning the deiay. (G.o. No. R. 3700-1—L.R. 452-06-2, dated 13th December, 1907)
No comments:
Post a Comment