By the Court — The point of law referred to the Full Bench is "whether the Board could review its own orders in cases under the Rajasthan (Protection of Tenants) Ordinance, 1949." 2. We heard the counsel for the parties. It was urged on behalf of those who objected to the review being heard that a , right of review does not exist unless granted by a statute and no right had been given by the Rajasthan (Protection of Tenants) Ordinance, 1949. The Board could correct an arithmetical mistake under its inherent powers but could not confer jurisdiction upon itself to hear a review. 3. Secondly it was urged that the Rajasthan Revenue Courts Act of 1951 did not apply to cases under the Ordinance by virtue of sec. 3 of the former Act wherein it was laid down that "except as otherwise specifically provided herein, nothing in this Act shall in any way affect the provisions of the Rajasthan Removal of Trees Ordinance and Rajasthan Protection of Tenants Ordinance." Therefore the provision for review made in the Rajasthan Revenue Courts Act did not enable the Board to hear a review in the Rajasthan (Protection of Tenants) Ordinance cases. 4. It is true that right of review does not exist unless it is granted by a statute. But such right has been given to the Board by sec. 24 of the Rajasthan Revenue Courts Act. The question for determination only, therefore, is whether by virtue of this section the Board could review its orders even in the Rajasthan (Protection of Tenants) Ordinance cases and what was the effect of sec. 3 of the same Act as quoted above. 5. The Rajasthan Revenue Courts Act was passed to provide for and regulate the jurisdiction and procedure of all revenue courts and officers in Rajasthan. Therefore it applied to all such courts and officers. The saving made in sec. 3 of this Act was in respect of the special provisions made in some of the special Acts. When any provision had been made in any of the Acts and Ordinances mentioned in sec. 3 the provisions of the Rajasthan Revenue Courts Act did not apply. However, where no such provision had been made in these special Acts the procedure laid down in the Rajasthan Revenue Courts Act would apply. When any provision had been made in any of the Acts and Ordinances mentioned in sec. 3 the provisions of the Rajasthan Revenue Courts Act did not apply. However, where no such provision had been made in these special Acts the procedure laid down in the Rajasthan Revenue Courts Act would apply. The Rajasthan (Protection of Tenants) Ordinance was not a self contained enactment and for matters not provided therein the provisions of the Rajasthan Revenue Courts Act must be considered to apply. 6. We have also gone through the judgment of the Rajasthan High Court in Nathulal vs. Collector Sawai Jaipur. The cases under the Rent Control Order were of a quasi judicial nature and the officers who deal with them were said to have some trappings of a court but they were not courts of civil jurisdiction. It was on this ground that the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code were held not to apply to such cases. This is however, not the case with regard to the proceedings taken under the Rajasthan (Protection of Tenants) Ordinance. These proceedings are taken by Revenue Officers of the status of an S.D.O. who are governed by the Rajasthan Revenue Courts Act and they have not some trappings of a court but are revenue courts and the applications provided under sec. 10 (2) of the Ordinance to the Revenue Board are also as Revenue Court of the highest jurisdiction. Therefore, the observations made by the Honble Judges of the High Court in that case did not apply to case under the Rajasthan (Protection of Tenants) Ordinance, 1949. 7. Further in a writ case No. 21 of 1951 decided on 20th February 1952 it has been held by a Full Bench of the Rajasthan High Court that Rajasthan Board of Revenue was not competent to review its judgment in a case under the Ordinance arising from the territories of the former Tonk State by virtue of the Land Regulations of Tonk State or the Code of Civil Procedure before the passing of the Rajasthan Revenue Courts (Procedure and Jurisdiction) Act, 1951. But the position became different after the passing of the Rajasthan Revenue Courts Act, 1951 and the Revenue Board can exercise its powers under sec. 24 of the Rajasthan Revenue Courts Act in cases arising under the Ordinance and review its own decisions. 8. But the position became different after the passing of the Rajasthan Revenue Courts Act, 1951 and the Revenue Board can exercise its powers under sec. 24 of the Rajasthan Revenue Courts Act in cases arising under the Ordinance and review its own decisions. 8. This view of the Honble High Court supports fully the view taken by the Board and we hold that the Board of Revenue is competent under the Rajasthan Revenue Courts Act to review its own orders passed in cases arising out of the Ordinance. The reference is answered in the affirmative.