1. The revenue officer for the settlement of rents in the villages of Kalagampudi and Pedamamipalli, Narasapur Taluk, Kistna District made a record of rights under Chapter XI of the Estates Land Act. The appeal of the proprietor of....Pedamamipalli to the Board of Revenue against the record of sights made by the revenue officer has been dismissed. He now moves the High Court to revise the order of the Board of Revenue.

2. Two points arise for decision in this case : (1) Has the High Court revisional jurisdiction over the orders of the Board passed under Sections 171 and 172 of the Estates Land Act ? and (2) If the question of jurisdiction is answered in the affirmative, should the High Court exercise its revisional jurisdiction in this case ?

3.The first point has been fully argued by Mr. Ramadoss for the petitioner and Mr. Venkatrayaliah for the respondents. We have also heard the Government Pleader to whom we gave notice to appear for the Board of Revenue as it was represented to us that a number of civil revision petitions were pending in the High Court in which the question of jurisdiction was involved. After a careful consideration of the arguments in the case I see no r