ccix 



In their Proceedings, 11th. November 1841, the Board remarked as 

 follows : — " Under this view of the case, it is not considered exj)edient . 

 to raise abstract questions of the extent of the Mirasidars' rights in 

 regard to the village waste. No opinion on these points would be 

 binding upon any court of law in which the questions might be mooted 

 by parties dissatisfied with the dictum of the Revenue authorities, 

 and it seems quite unnecessary to raise the question with a view to its 

 solution by the highest legal authorities, unless it could be shown that 

 under the existing practice the interests of Government are compro- 

 mised or injured. 



" Mr. Kindersley's first question is whether in default of means or 

 desire of Mirasidars to exercise their right of cultivating the waste, 

 their consent is necessary before the Government can grant the land 

 for cultivation to a stranger. To this the Board can only reply, that 

 it is the custom generally to give the option of occupation to the 

 Mirasidars -and to the kadeem ryot where no Mirasi exists, in prefer- 

 ence to a stranger. It matters not what the law may be on this 

 point ; much of the revenue practice is founded on custom, and the 

 practice is both, the Board believe, favorable to Government and in 

 accordance with the feelings and sentiments of "the people. 



" The second question is to the effect whether the offer of strangers 

 can be accepted by Government if more favorable than that of the 

 Mirasidars ? To this the Board answer, most unquestionably it cannot. 

 The admission of such a practice would virtually set aside the prescribed 

 remission of assessment on the redemption of waste existing in every 

 Province. 



'' The Board cannot conceive a case in which the interests of 

 Government can suffer materially by the continuance of the system 

 that now prevails. If the Mirasidars can, by themselves or through 

 others, undertake the cultivation of all the reclaimable lands of their 

 village and pay the established dues of Government, no loss is sustained 

 by the State. If they cannot do this or if they neglect to do it, then 

 the rule is to give the land as well as the Toondoovarum thereon to any 

 stranger who chooses to undertake it. Thus the right of Government 

 which is simply the right to claim the authorized assessment is abundantly 

 protected. 



" The only possible profit or advantage that Government could 

 derive in assuming the right to dispose of waste laud for cultivation 

 without reference to the Mirasidars or ancient cultivators would consist 

 in the sums they might derive, over and above the legitimate annual 

 land-tax, by selling to the best advantage the right of occupancy, as 

 the ryots now do in some instances. The assertion of such a right, 

 even if it vjas upheld by judicial decision, would lead, it is believed, to 

 much discontent and dissatisfaction, and be powerless in the main as a 

 means of raising revenue." 



In the Despatch of the Court of Directors, dated 3rd July 1844, they 

 remarked " from the perusal of the decree of the Provincial Court, it 

 appears to us that that tribunal has declared the law to be in accord- 

 ance with what, in para. 55 of our Despatch, dated 28th July 1841, we 

 desired might be generally adopted in practice in similar cases, viz., 

 that when proposals were made by Porakudi ryots for waste lands in 



