1. This petition raises an important question as to the powers of a Collector under Section 84, Tenancy Act. It would appear that the first opponent is the tenant of the petitioner and according to the petitioner, the name of the first opponents father appeared as a protected tenant in the record of rights. The father died some time in May 1952, and it is the case of the petitioner that opponent 1 surrendered the lease.

The petitioner approached the Mamlatdar and obtained an order under Section 29(2). According to the petitioner he had already obtained possession of the land from opponent 1 and he got the possession confirmed by the order of the Mamlatdar. The case of the tenant was that notwithstanding the order of the Mamlatdar he in fact continued to be in possession and he was only dispossessed 6y the landlord sometime in 1954. Thereupon he approached the Collector and the Collector passed an order under Section 34 summarily evicting the petitioner. The petitioner approached the Revenue Tribunal which held against him and he has now come before us under Article 227 of the Constitution.

2. The powers at summary eviction are always drastic and it should be the duty of the C