SHIVDAYAL, J.

1. This matter has been referred to this Full Bench to interpret the phrase "subject to rules" in section 244 of the M.P. Land Revenue Code, 1959, (hereinafter called the Land Revenue Code). The Division Bench, which referred this matter to us, saw an apparent conflict between two Division Bench decisions of this Court in Ithoba v. Collector of Chhindwara 1964 JLJ 606: 1964 RN 396: ILR 1965 MP 293 and Bhagwat Prasad v. Government of M.P. 1966 JLJ 826: 1966 MPLJ 557.

2. The question before us is:--

Whether the phrase "subject to rules made in this behalf" in section 244 of the M.P. Land Revenue Code, 1959, connotes that until the contemplated rules are framed, the Gram Panchayat or the Tahsildar cannot exercise the power conferred on them for disposal of abadi sites.

3. The words "subject to rules made in this behalf" or similar words are commonly employed in enactments, where the Legislature contemplates framing or rules in exercise of delegated powers. We are of the opinion that that expression has to be interpreted according to the context in which it is employed. In each case the scheme and the provisions of the Act have to be examined. Where the power is confe