The inherent powers of a Civil Court can be exercised by a revenue officer invested with the powers of a civil Court under Section 57A of the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1954, but such powers can be exercised only subject to the limitations under which such powers can be exercised by a civil Court, and cannot be invoked when there is a specific statutory provision for making the order sought to be made in exercise of the inherent powers.

( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against a judgment and order of Laik, J. dated December 23, 1964, whereby a rule nisi obtained by the appellants in an application under Article 226 of the Constitution, was discharged.

( 2 ) CERTAIN plots of land recorded in Khatian No. 140 of Mouza Dwarir Jangal in the district of 24 Parganas and included in the Revisional Record of Rights formed part of the property owned by one Rajendra Chandra Banerjee, since deceased. The said Revisional Record of Rights was prepared under the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1954, (hereinafter referred to as the Act ). The appellants are the executors of the will of the said deceased. In course of the administration of the estate of the deceased, the appellants made various settlements of the said land and in the Record of Rights as finally published, the names of the tenants were duly recorded. It is alleged that the lands recorded in the said Khatian No. 140 were settled by the appellants, as executors of the Estate of the deceased, with one Jayanta Kumar Banerjee, long before the vesting of the estates under the provisions of the Act.

( 3 ) IN April, 1963, the appellants received a notice from the respondent No. 3 under Section 57 of the Act directing them to file relevant records in connection with the settlement recorded in Khatian No. 140, as in the opinion of the respondent No. 3, the settlement was invalid. The case number given in the notice was 124 and in the notice it was specified that the case was under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

( 4 ) THIS notice is dated March 27, 1963. The particulars of the case as set out at the top of the notice are as follows: --"case No. 124 under section 151, Civil Procedure Code Notice Under Section 57 of Act I of 1954. West Bengal Act for Acquisition of Zamindari rights and rights of the intermediaries. "

( 5 ) IT is the validity of this notice, and the threatened proceedings under the same, that were challenged by the appellants in the writ petition. The grounds on which the validity of the notice have been challenged are; (1) Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure cannot be invoked for correction or revision of a finally published record of rights. (2) The respondent No. 3 is not a civil Court and the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure cannot be applied by him for correction of a finally published record of rights. (3) Proceedings for correction of record of rights cannot be initiated under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure as there are specific provisions in the Act for such correction and also a right of appeal. (4) The proceedings have been initiated arbitrarily and without jurisdiction as there is no error apparent on the face of the record of rights. (5) Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure does not confer any new power or authority to revise the finally published record of rights. (6) There is nothing to show that the respondent No. 3 has been invested with any power under Section 15 of the Code of Civil Procedure. (7) Initiation of the proceedings under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure is an abuse of the provisions of that Section. (8) Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure does not confer any power and for that reason no order can he made for investing any authority to exercise any power under that Section.

( 6 ) THE appellant No. 1 is the widow of the said Rajendra Chandra Banerjee and the appellant No. 2 is his son. Jayanta Kumar Banerjee in whose favour the settlement of the land recorded in Khatian No. 140 had been made, is the son of the appellant No. 2. Jayanta had been recorded in the finally published record of rights prepared under the provisions of the Act, having an interest in the land as of a Raiyat, with occupancy right, the annual rent being about Rs. 112. On June 12, 1961, the respondent No. 3 granted a certified copy of the record of rights. The said notice dated March 27, 1963, was in Bengali and it required