- (1.) THIS is a Special Appeal preferred under Proviso to Sec. 10 (1) of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the decision of a learned Single Member of the Board dated 11. 12. 1961.
(2.) THE circumstances giving rise to this appeal are that a revision application was preferred by the appellant against the Order of the Additional Collector, Bharatpur, dated 9. 6. 61. THE appellant had applied for the mutation of certain lands in his name. THE application was rejected by the Gram Panchayat Purawai Khera. THE appeal preferred to the Additional Collector was held to be "not maintainable". This was questioned in revision before the Board. THE learned Single member rejected it with the observation that as the second appeal lay to the Commissioner under Sec. 76 (a) of the Act, the appellant should have availed of that remedy. THE learned Member held that the proceedings were neither connected with Settlement nor with Land Records. Now, the mutations on the death of a Khatedar are made only in the Record of Rights as prescribed by Sec. 114 of the Act and maintained under Sec. 32 thereof. It is the Land Records Officer who maintains them or gets them maintained and causes all changes therein to be recorded as per Sec. 132 (2 ). The Act nowhere defines what are the matters relating to land records. But when the Village Papers are maintained as part of the Record of Rights prepared during the course of Record Operations and the responsibility for maintaining thereof has been laid on the Land Records Officer, the matters connected therewith could not be anything other than matters connected with Land Records. The mutation proceedings having thus been found to be matters connected with Land Records, Sec. 76 (a) of the Act held by the learned Single Member to cover the present case will be not found to be applicable. In that case a revision would lie to the Board against the appellate decision of the Collector unless any other provision of law came in the way. The argument that Sec. 84 of the Act does not provide for any revision in matters connected with Land Records will not also cause any deviation to this position. For "mutations" have also been categorised to be "judicial Proceedings" vide the first Schedule of the Act, and Sec. 24 does enable the Board to revise such proceedings. A second appeal is, however, provided by Sec. 76 (c) of the Act from the Orders of the Land Records Officer (which an appeal from Collector or Additional Collector will be) to the Director of Land Records. The Board is the Director of Land Records in Rajasthan. The second appeal will thus lie to the Board in its capacity as Director of Land Records, and not to the Commissioner as has been held by the Order under appeal. It should not, therefore, have been held as has been done in the impugned order that the appellant had not availed of the remedy available to him by way of appeal. The Board has been treating revision as appeal and vice versa when and where necessary. The present revision even if it was treated to be an Appeal would be found to have been preferred within limitation. The revision is,| therefore, found to have been dismissed erroneously without applying the proper provisions of law thereto. The Special Appeal is, therefore, hereby accepted, the order of the learned Single Member dated 11th December, 1961 is set aside. It is hereby further directed that this case shall be listed now for being heard before a Division Bench of the Board. .;