JUDGMENT Devadoss, J. 1. This is an application to revise the order of the Collector of Chingleput District varying the award made by the Sub-Collector of Chingleput under Section 75, Estates Land Act. The contention of the petitioner is that the Collector had no jurisdiction to interfere with the award passed under Section 75 by the Sub-Collector, inasmuch as his award amounted to a decree and an appeal should have been preferred for challenging the decree of the Sub-Collector. 2. It is contended for the respondent that the Collector could interfere under Section 205, Estates Land Act, with an order passed by the Sub-Collector under Section 75. 3. Without deciding whether the Collector has jurisdiction to interfere with the order made by the Sub-Collector under Section 75, I am satisfied that granting that he has such power, the grounds upon which he could interfere are absent in this case. The revisional jurisdiction under Section 205 can be exercised only if the officer, whose decision is sought to be revised, appears to have exercised a jurisdiction not vested in him by law, or to have failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested, or while acting in the exercise of his jurisdiction to have contravened some express provision of law affecting the decision on the merits, where such contravention produced a serious miscarriage of justice. In this case the Sub-Collector accepted the award made by the Revenue Inspector and made that his award, and the Collector modified it. Inasmuch as substantial justice between the parties has been done by the Collectors order and as the petitioner was not honest enough to admit that a certain amount payable by him was paid by or on behalf of the respondent, even though I am entitled to interfere with the order of the Collector yet I decline to interfere with it and dismiss this petition without costs.