KAN SINGH, J.—Gordhan and seven others, who were allotted agricultural land for cultivation in village Chandji-ki-Kheri, Tehsil Mandalgarh, by Tehsildar on 15-4-60, and whose allotment has been cancelled by the Government on 18-1-63 (vide Ex. 4 on the record), have filed this writ petition under Art.226 of the Constitution questioning the validity of the aforesaid Government order.

2. The petitioners were residents of village Chandji-ki-Kheri and according to them they had no cultivable land of their own prior to the allotment in question. Consequently they applied to the Tehsildar Mandalgarh for allotting them land. The Tehsildar accepted their applications and granted them land comprised in Khasra No. 226, 720 and 723, which roughly measured 75 bighas. The petitioners proceed to say that after the allotment they were put in possession of the land and after they were so put in possession they made several inprovements over it. They sank well in it and made it cultivable. They had also raised crops over it and had been paying rent to the Government regularly. One Shri Motilal Dhakar respondent No. 2, who was the Sarpanch of village Panchayat Gopalpura filed a revision petition against the order of allotment to the Government of Rajasthan. Pursuant to that application the Deputy Secretary to the Government in the Revenue Department heard the revision application and, accepting the same, cancelled the allotment (vide order Ex. 4 on the record ).

3. In challenging the validity of this order Ex. 4 the petitioners aver that no revision lay to the Government under the Rules of allotment and as such the order Ex. 4, was wholly without jurisdiction. Then, as regards the merits of the Government order, it is urged that there was no objection whatsoever from any quarter before the revenue authorities against the application for allotment and, therefore, it was in order. It is then contended that the land in question was not a pasture land as mentioned in the Government order. Then it is said that Shri Motilal, who was the Sarpanch of village Panchayat Gopalpura had no right to file the revision application as village Chandji ki-Kheri was not in the Panchayat circle of Gopalpura. Lastly, it is urged that the Deputy Secretary to the Government could not have dealt with the matter on his own. Though appearance has been entered on behalf of the respondents, by the learned Government Advocate for respondents Nos. 1 and 3, and by Shri Arjunlal Mehta for the other respondent, no reply has been filed to the writ petition.

4. The main question that falls for consideration is whether Government were competent to entertain any revision against the order of allotment. Sec. 101 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956, provides for allotment of land for agricultural purposes. The relevant portion of this section reads as under:

"Sec. 101. Allotment of land for agricultural purposes—(1) Save as otherwise provided elsewhere by this Act, land for agricultural purposes shall be allotted by a Tehsildar after entering the application in the register kept for the purpose and allotment by him shall be subject to such rules as may be made by the State Government from time to time in this behalf."

5. The Government have framed the Rules known as the Rajasthan Land Revenue (Allotment of Land for Agricultural Purposes) Rules, 1957, hereinafter to be referred as the "Rules", in excercise of their rule making power and the procedure for allotment is laid down in these rules. Shri U. L. Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioners, invited our attention to R. 15 of the Rules which provides that "any person aggrieved with the Tehsildars order of allotment, or an order rejecting an application for allotment, may appeal to the Collector within 30 days of such order". It is argued by Shri Gupta that as no appeal was filed in accordance with the Rules, the order of allotment in favour of the petitioners had become final and consequently it could not be interfered with by the G