JUDGMENT : V. Balakrishna Eradi, J. The short question that arises for decision in this writ appeal is whether the Revenue Divisional Officer, while disposing of an appeal preferred before him under sub-section (4) of S.29 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 (hereinafter called the Act) against an order passed by the Tahsildar preparing the record of rights in respect of a land, has the power to remand the case to the Tahsildar for fresh disposal The learned single Judge was of opinion that in view of the specific provisions contained in sub-section (6) of S.29 and sub-rule (3) of R.28 of the Kerala Land Reforms (Tenancy) Rules, a power of remand is not vested in the Appellate Authority, namely the Revenue Divisional Officer, and accordingly the learned Judge allowed the writ petition, out of which this writ appeal arises, and quashed the order Ext. P2 dated 26-12-1974 passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Chengannur remanding the case to the Tahsildar for fresh disposal after examination of certain additional witnesses. The 1st respondent in the writ petition is the appellant before us and it is contended by her that the aforesaid view taken by the learned single Judge is not correct 2. Sub-section (1) of S.29 of the Act provides that any person interested in any land may at any time within 10 years from the commencement of the Act or such further period as the Government may by notification in the Gazette specify in that behalf, apply to the Tahsildar of the taluk in which any land is situated for the preparation of a record of rights in respect of that land. Sub-section (2) states that on receipt of an application under sub-section (1) the Tahsildar snail prepare the record of rights in respect of the concerned land in such manner as may be prescribed. What the record of rights should contain is enumerated in sub-section (3). Thereafter it is provided by sub-section (4) that any person aggrieved by any entry in the record of rights prepared by the Tahsildar under sub-section (2) may, within such period as may be prescribed, appeal to the Revenue Divisional Officer having jurisdiction over the area in which the land is situate. It is stated in sub-s.(5) that the appeal aforementioned shall be in such form and shall contain such particulars as may be prescribed. It is stated in sub-s.(5) that the appeal aforementioned shall be in such form and shall contain such particulars as may be prescribed. Then we come to sub-section (6), which being of special relevance requires to be extracted in full: "On receipt of an appeal under sub-section (4), the Revenue Divisional Officer shall, after giving an opportunity to all persons interested in the land to which the record of rights relates, dispose of the appeal in such manner as may be prescribed". The manner of disposing of the appeal having been thus left by the statute to be prescribed by the rules, we shall now turn to the relevant provisions contained in the Land Reforms (Tenancy) Rules. R.27 deals with appeals against record of rights. Sub-rule (1) states that an appeal by a person aggrieved by any entry in the record of rights prepared by the Tahsildar shall be filed within thirty days from the date of communication to him of the record of rights. Sub-rule (2) says that the appeal shall be filed in Form No.11 and shall be accompanied by the original order or an attested copy of the record of rights. R.28 has the heading "Disposal of appeal against records of rights" and that rule reads: "(1) On receipt of the memorandum of appeal, the Revenue Divisional Officer. after sending for the record of the case if he thinks fit so to do, and after fixing a day for hearing the appellant and hearing him accordingly if he appears on that day and after perusal of the memorandum of appeal and the record of the case, where it has been sent for, may, if he satisfied that there is no sufficient ground for interference or if he has reason to believe that the appellant is not aggrieved, dismiss the appeal forthwith. (2) Where the Revenue Divisional Officer does not under sub-rule (i) dismiss the appeal, he shall fix a day for hearing the appeal, send for the record of the case where it has not been seat for and serve notice intimating the day fixed for the hearing of the appeal on all other persons whose names appear in the record of rights and on such other persons, if any, whose names are shown in the memorandum of appeal as persons whose names ought to appear in the record of rights; and such notice shall be accompanied by a copy of the memorandum of appeal. (3) On the day fixed under sub-rule (2) for hearing the appeal or on any other day to which the hearing may be adjourned, the Revenue Divisional Officer shall, after hearing such of the parties who appear before him and such other persons to whom notices have not been sent but who appear and desire to be heard and after making such other enquiries as he deems necessary, pass an order (a) dismissing the appeal; or (b) directing the Tahsildar to make such additions, alterations, deletions or modifications as are in the opinion of the Revenue Divisional Officer necessary in the record of rights. (4) The Revenue Divisional Officer shall send a copy of his order under sub-rule (1) or sub-rule (3) to the Tahsildar who shall file it with the record of the case. (5) When the Revenue Divisional Officer passes an order under clause (b) of sub-rule (3), the Tahsildar shall carry out the direction contained in the order in his own hand adding a footnote in the record of rights specifying the authority to make the modifications and furnish a copy of the record of rights as modified to the village officer of the village in which the land is situate". Under sub-rule (3) of the above rule the Revenue Divisional Officer after e hearing such of the parties or other persons notified who appear before him and after making such other enquiries as he deems necessary, is empowered to pass only two types of orders, namely (a) an order dismissing the appeal, or (b) an order directing the Tahsildar to make such additions, alterations, deletions or modifications as are in the opinion of the Revenue Divisional Officer necessary in the record of rights. Hence under the scheme of this rule, in a case where the appeal is not dismissed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, it is imperative that he himself should finally determine what addition, alteration, deletion or modification is called for in the record of rights prepared by the subordinate authority, namely the Tahsildar To aid him in this process power is conferred on him by the next rule, namely R.29, to inspect any property or thing concerning which any question may arise before him and also to receive additional evidence, either oral or documentary, and to make or cause to be made any enquiry which in his opinion is necessary for the disposal of the appeal. While it is thus open to the Revenue Divisional Officer under the provisions of R.29 to cause an enquiry to be made in respect of any specific matter on which a report may be called, the disposal of the appeal can be only after the receipt of such enquiry report and while so disposing of the appeal the appellate authority would have to determine on the basis of all the materials available before him what additions, alterations, deletions or modifications are necessary in the record of rights already prepared by the Tahsildar. The function of the Tahsildar after the disposal of the appeal by the appellate authority is only to carry out the direction contained in the appellate order by making the necessary modifications etc in the record of rights and adding a footnote therein specifying the authority under which such modifications are being made. This is made specifically clear by sub-rule (5) of R.28. 3. It is no doubt well established that when an appellate power is conferred on an authority or tribunal without any particularisation of the scope or ambit of such power or the mode in which it shall be exercised, it may be impliedly taken as carrying with it the incidental power to remand the matter to the original authority if the circumstances of the case so require see Dharmadas v. S. T. A. Tribunal ( 1962 KLT 505 (F.B)). But this principle will have no application to cases where the statute conferring the appellate power either itself exhaustively sketches the impact of the power or the mode of its exercise or delegates that function to the rule-making authority to be prescribed by the rules and provision is contained in the rules laying down the mode of the exercise and the scope of the appellate power or the mode of disposal of the appeal to be adopted by the appellate authority. In such cases the powers of the appellate authority will have to be gathered from the four corners of the provisions contained in the statute or the relevant rules and there is no scope for any assumption by implication that the appellate authority has an inherent power of remand vested in it see Joseph v. District Judge ( 1963 KLT 64 ). Coming to the statute before us it is clearly indicated in sub-section (6) of S.29 that the appellate authority should dispose of the appeal only in such manner as may be prescribed. As noticed already, the only modes of disposal of an appeal by the appellate authority permitted by R.28 (3) are either by an order dismissing the appeal or by an order directing the Tahsildar to make such additions, alterations, deletions etc. as are in the opinion of the Revenue Divisional Officer necessary in the record of rights. It is therefore clear that the statute and the rules did not intend to vest in the appellate authority a power of remand of the case to the Tahsildar. We are, therefore, in complete agreement with the view taken by the learned single Judge that the Revenue Divisional Officer acted without jurisdiction in remanding the whole case to the Tahsildar for fresh disposal after examination of certain additional witnesses. The Writ Appeal therefore fails and is dismissed. The parties will bear their respective costs. Dismissed.