( 1 ) A very significant and substantial question of law has arisen as to whether an appeal would lie against the decision of the Special Mahalkari, ("the mamlatdar" for short) who has decided the question about the tenancy rights and resultant compensation, in this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

( 2 ) IT would be pertinent to have a close look to the material facts giving rise to the present petition and the merits of the aforesaid question. The petitioner purchased agricultural lands bearing S. nos. 5 and 6/1 of village Mokha of Mundra taluka of Kutch district by a registered sale deed dated 10. 4. 1950 from respondent No. 2, Panbai Velji. (the disputed property for short ). Thereafter, respondent No. 1 claiming to be a tenant in respect of the disputed land applied on 30. 3. 1963, before the revenue authority who was known as Special Mahalkari at the relevant point of time in Kutch region. The case was registered as 158 of 1963 under the Bombay Inams (Kutch area) Abolition Act, 1958 (kutch Inams Act for short ). After observing necessary procedure, and hearing the petitioner, the Mamlatdar allowed the application and granted occupancy ce