This is a reference made by a Division Bench in a case relating to a sale of land in pursuance of notification No. 7 dated 20th February, 1943 of the covenanting Bikaner State. 2. The terms of reference are : (i) Can a subordinate revenue court when in doubt about its jurisdiction make a reference to the Board or not ? (ii) Will an appeal against a decision of a S. D. O. under the aforesaid notification lie to the Collector or to the Divisional Commissioner ? 3. The circumstances which have given rives to this reference are that an appeal was submitted by Shri Loon Karan Joshi to the Collector against an order of the S.D.O Bikaner (South) dated 26.9.1953. The Collector is of opinion that the scheme of appeals in such case would be as provided under sec. G Clause 32 (i) of notification No 7 referred to above. According to this clause appeals from orders of the nazim (which post has been equated with that of a Sub-Divisional Officer) lay to the Revenue Commissioner of the former Bikaner State. The court of the present Collector has, however, been not equated with that of Revenue Commissioner of the covenanting Bikaner State. He has, therefore, made a reference. 4. As regards the first point referred to by the Division Bench, the provisions of sec. 28 of the Rajasthan Revenue Courts (Procedure and Jurisdiction) Act, 1951, supply a complete answer. The Collector could have made a reference in a case or proceedings decided by or pending before any court subordinate to him, for the purposes of satisfying himself as to the legality or propriety of the order passed. In the present case as the appeal was pending before the Collector himself he should not have made a reference to the Board. 5. As regards the second point it is clear that the question of forum of appeals would be determined with reference to the provisions contained in the aforesaid notification. In the then former Bikaner State there was no intermediate court between the nazim and the Revenue Commissioner and hence naturally no provision is to be found for appeals before the Collector. Appeals from the decisions of the Revenue Commissioner lay before the Revenue Minister whose decisions were appealable to the Board of Revenue. This scheme would not apply, in the present set up without material adjustments. Appeals from the decisions of the Revenue Commissioner lay before the Revenue Minister whose decisions were appealable to the Board of Revenue. This scheme would not apply, in the present set up without material adjustments. The Board of Revenue is now the highest court of appeal, reference and revision and below it is the court of the Divisional Commissioner. The court of the Collector is also in existence in the present set up and there is no reason why first appeals against the decisions of the Assistant Collector in mal mandi cases should not be heard by the Collector. We would answer the reference accordingly.