The Land Record Officer has jurisdiction under Section 136 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 to correct the entry made in the Record of Rights of the Annual Register.

1. - Petitioners Khyali Ram and Sohanlal were allotted ten Bighas of land bearing Khasra No. 77 of village Sondi by the Tehsildar, (Land Records), Nohar, vide order dated 4.9.1976. The allotment was made to the petitioners on the basis of temporary allotment of land to them since 1968. In the year 1977, the Tehsildar, Nohar, moved an application under Section 136 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act (for short, 'the Act') in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Nohar, for cancellation of the allotment made in favour of the petitioners on the ground that the land in question is a Johad Paitan land which has been wrongly recorded as 'Barani land' during the settlement operations. The learned Sub-Divisional Officer, after giving notices to the petitioners, by his order dated 3.7.1978, cancelled the' allotment made in favour of the petitioners and declared the land as 'Johad Paitan land'. While cancelling the allotment, the Sub-Divisional Officer observed that the land in question was earlier recorded in the Record of Rights as Johad Paitan land during the last settlement operations. Dissatisfied with the order dated 3.7.1978, passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Nohar, the petitioners preferred an appeal before the Revenue Appellate Authority, Bikaner. The Revenue Appellate Authority, Bikaner, vide its order dated 28.3.79, dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioners and maintained the order dated 3.7.78, passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer. Aggrieved with the judgment dated 28.3.79, passed by the Revenue Appellate Authority, Bikaner, the petitioners preferred an appeal before the Board of Revenue for Rajasthan at Ajmer and the learned Member of the Board of Revenue, by his judgment dated 15.4.86, dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant-petitioners. It is against this judgment dated 15.4.86, passed by the Board of Revenue that the petitioners have preferred this writ petition.

2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the settlement operations were completed in the year 1973 while the application under Section 136 of the Act has been moved by the Tehsildar in the year 1977 and after the completion of the settlement operations, the Tehsildar had no power to correct the entry made in the Record of Rights and cannot change the nature of the land. It has, also, been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the matter has been decided by the Sub- Divisional Officer without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. The learned Additional Government Advocate, on the other hand, has supported the judgment passed by the Board of Revenue, the Revenue Appellate Authority and the learned Sub-Divisional Officer, Nohar. It is contended by the learned Additional Government Advocate that after completion of the settlement operations, the Sub-Divisional Officer, who has been conferred with the powers of the Land Record Officer, has power to pass the order regarding correction of the entry in the Annual Register.

3. We have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.

4. The question which requires consideration in the present case, is: whether the Land Record Officer (Sub-Divisional Officer), Nohar, has jurisdiction under Section 136 of the Act, to correct the entry made in the Record of Rights of the Annual Register ? Section 136 of the Act deals with the Decision of Dispute relating to class or tenure of any tenant or regarding the rent or revenue payable or regarding the entries in the Annual Register and authorises the Land Record Officer to decide these disputes in accordance with the provisions of Section 123 or 124 or 125 of the Act, as the case may be. Section 132 of the Act, which deals with the maintenance of the Record of Rights, after completion of the survey/settlement operations, authorises the Land Record Officer to prepare annually or at such longer interval as the State Government may prescribe, a set or amended sets, as the c