1. - The petitioner who claims to be Harijan has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the order passed by the Revenue Court i.e. S.D.O., Hanumangarh on 18.6.82 (Annex. 2) by which the suit filed by the present respondents No. 4 to 8 for eviction under Section 183 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 (for short the Act) came to be decreed against the petitioner and Shri Milkhi Ram, respondent No. 9 against which an appeal was preferred before the Revenue appellate authority, Bikaner which came to be dismissed on 27.1.1983 (Annex. 3). Second appeal preferred before the Board of Revenue also came to be dismissed on 5.10.88 (Annex. 4). These orders have been challenged by the petitioner in this petition before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. Strictly speaking this is not a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution but this is a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

2. Learned Counsel Shri Sharma for the petitioner vehemently submitted that the Revenue Court had no jurisdiction to decide the suit filed by the respondent Nos. 4 to 8 under the Tenancy Act. He submitted that it is only the civil court which ha