Judgement K. C. Chunder, J. :- These are the two rules obtained by the landlord and the tenant against the same judgment. 2. Briefly, the facts are that 6/1 New Road, Alipur was occupied by the Govt. of Bengal now represented by the State of West Bengal as a tenant under Durga Debi. The proceedings for fixation of rent ended on 24-1-49 by the appellate authority fixing the rent at Rs. 400 per month. Further proceedings were initiated by Durga Debi, the landlord, on 23-6-49 u/s. 8 of the Act of 1948. The State of West Bengal also claimed reduction of rent alleging want of jurisdiction in fixing the rent on 24-1-49 at Rs. 400. On 7-9-49 both the cases of Durga Debi and of the State of West Bengal were dismissed. The State of West Bengal took no appeal or any further steps The order as far as the State of West Bengal was concerned became final on 7-9-49. The State of West Bengal has now moved this Ct. under Art. 227 of the Constitution for setting aside that order of 7-9-49. It has already been repeatedly decided that where the order became final before the Constitution came into force, Art. 227 will not have any application. The Rule obtained by the State of West Bengal which is numbered 812 of 1950 is accordingly discharged with costs. 3. Durga Debi, the landlord, went up on appeal. The appeal was filed when the Act of 1948 was in force but it was decided on 31-3-50, the appellate Ct. applying the provisions of the new Act of 1950 in connection with the determination of the rent to be certified u/s. 8. A Rule was obtained by the landlord both u/s. 32 (4) of the Act of 1950 and Art. 227 of the Constitution. As far as Art. 227 of the Constitution is concerned this very Bench has repeatedly pointed out that it is not meant to correct slight errors-though there appears to be no error in the present case and the same view has been taken also by a Special Bench of this Ct. in the case of Dalmia Jain Airways Ltd., v. Sukumar Mukherjee, reported in A. I. R. (38) 1951 Cal. 193. 4. As far as S. 32 (4) of the Act of 1950 is concerned this Ct. in the case of Dalmia Jain Airways Ltd., v. Sukumar Mukherjee, reported in A. I. R. (38) 1951 Cal. 193. 4. As far as S. 32 (4) of the Act of 1950 is concerned this Ct. has already pointed out that where the appeal was filed under the Act of 1948 s. 32 (4) has no application as it refers by the words "such appeal" to appeals filed u/s. 32 (1), that is under the Act of 1950. S. 17 (3) of the Act of 1950 makes it incumbent on the Rent Controller or the appellate authority to fix a standard rent in accordance with the provisions of the Act of 1950 if the proceedings were pending either before the Rent Controller or the Appellate Authority when the Act of 1950 came into force but that section did not make the appeal "such appeal" under the Act of 1950. S. 32 (4) has, therefore, no application. 5. The Rule (823 of 1950) is accordingly discharged but without costs. 6. Sen, J:- I agree. Rule discharged.