JUDGMENT 1. These five special appeals arise out of common judgment of the earned Single Judge dated 25.3.1992 disposing of all the writ petitions filed by S ate Farm Corporation of India Ltd. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the Government of India decided to set up mechanised farms in different parts of the country in Collaboration with U.S.S.R. On the request of the Central Government the State Government transferred 46.552 Bighas of land for establishing the State Farm at Suratgarh. In the year 1964 more land was made available for establishing the mechanised farm at Jetsar Some more farms were established by the Union of India in Orissa, Punjab, Haryana and Mysore. Thus, the Government of India vide resolution dated 14.7.1969 placed also the farms under the control of a Corporation in the name of State Farm Corporation of India Ltd. in pursuance of the resolution dated 15.12.1970 an agreement was entered into between the President of India and the State Farm Corporation of India Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation) whereby all the administrative and managerial control of both the State Farms i.e. at Suratgarh and Jetsar was transferred to the said Corporation. It was agreed that the Corporation will pay the land revenue, rent and other charges which were being paid by the Government of India or those charges which are to be paid by the Government under the terms of the lease. The agreement also contemplates that in case the Corporation fails to pay land revenue etc. the Government of India will pay the same and in that event the amount will be recovered from the Corporation. 3. Under the directions of the Collector. Shri Ganganagar, the Tehsildar, Suratgarh, Anoopgarh and Raisinghnagar raised demand purported to be under the Rajasthan Colonisation (Temporary Cultivation and Lease) Conditions, 1955 for the land held by the Central State Farm at Suratgarh and Jetsar. This was challenged by the Corporation by way of writ petitions before this Court. This writ petitions were disposed of by the order of the learned Single Judge dated 16.11.1983. It was held that the State of Rajasthan was entitled to charge Malikana at the rate mentioned in the letter of the Government of India dated 7.4.1962 and accordingly directed that if any amount has been recovered from the Corporation for the period 1956-57 to 1963-64 above Rs. It was held that the State of Rajasthan was entitled to charge Malikana at the rate mentioned in the letter of the Government of India dated 7.4.1962 and accordingly directed that if any amount has been recovered from the Corporation for the period 1956-57 to 1963-64 above Rs. 2/- per Bigha then the same shall be refunded. It was also held that as agreed between the parties the Malikana was to be charged from the Corporation at the rate of Rs. 2/-per Bigha so long as the canals were non-perennial and at the rate of As. 4/- per Bigha if they became perennial, in respect of non-irrigated land Malikana was to be charged at the rate of Rs. 1/- per Bigha in respect of Barani land. 4. After the decision of the High Court, The State of Rajasthan revised the rates of Malikana charges under Rajasthan Colonisation (Temporary Cultivation Lease) Conditions, 1955. As per the revised rate, a demand was raised taking the Malikana charges to be at the rate of Rs. 8/- per Bigha. This was again challenged by the Corporation. The learned Single Judge partly allowed the writ petition and directed the State Government to charge Malikana from the Corporation at the rate of Rs. 4/- per Bigha and recover the surcharges on land revenue according to the Act and the Rules. 5. Challenging the judgment of the learned Single Judge, It is submitted by Mr. N.M. Lodha learned counsel appearing for the appellant Corporation that the lands covered under the Suratgarh Farm were irrigated by the Bhakra Canal System and the lands covered under the Jetsar Farm were being irrigated by the Indira Gandhi Canal. The Bhakra Canal Irrigation System was not perennial and vide Government order dated 3.3.1964 the Bhakra Canal 45 System was declared perennial w.e.f. Samvat Year 2020. It is further submitted that Rajasthan Canal Irrigation System has yet not been declared as perennial. He has invited our attention to Annexure 9, a typed copy of the letter from the Assistant Secretary, Government of Rajasthan to the Chief Engineer, Irrigation, Government of Rajasthan dated 3.3.1964. We have gone 50 through the document referred by the learned counsel. There is nothing in the said letter to support the contention. The time was given to both the learned counsel to produce any material whereby it can be said that Rajasthan Canal Irrigation System is not perennial. We have gone 50 through the document referred by the learned counsel. There is nothing in the said letter to support the contention. The time was given to both the learned counsel to produce any material whereby it can be said that Rajasthan Canal Irrigation System is not perennial. The record shows that the whole area came to be declared as perennial irrigated in 1964. Thus, the learned Single Judge has rightly held that the State Government was entitled to charge Malikana charges at the rate of Rs. 4/- per Bigha. We do not find any illegality in the order of the learned Single Judge, which calls for interference by this Court. For the same reason the appeal filed by the State for enhancement of the Malikana charges also deserves to be rejected. 6. Consequently, all the special appeals being devoid of merit are dismissed. No order as to cost.All Appeals Dismissed. *******