Reilly, J.

1. The questions referred to us are

(1) whether the High Court has power to interfere with a decision of the Board of Revenue under Chapter XI of the Madras Estates Land Act,

(2) whether the Board of Revenue has in this particular case exceeded the jurisdiction conferred upon it, and

(3) what should be "the final order to be passed in this case," i.e., on this revision petition.

2. It appears that under Section 164 of the Estates Land Act the Local Government ordered that a survey should be made and a record-of-rights should be prepared for 21 villages in the Mandasa Zamindari in the Ganjam district, which was done. On an application made by the ryots of the villages the Local Government afterwards ordered under Section 168 of the Act that a settlement of rent should be made for the villages. The Revenue Officer appointed for the purpose settled the rents for the villages. The ryots being dissatisfied, appealed against his orders to the Board of Revenue, which had been appointed by the Local Government to be the appellate authority for the purpose under Section 171 of the Act. Their appeal was dismissed as time-barred. Later on however the Board of Revenue in conseque