S. A. SHAH, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioner is a tenant of respondent no. 1 - Parsi Panchayat Board and Late Pirojbai Manekji Singaporewala-Parsi Girls School Trust Surat (hereinafter referred to as the Trust ). ( 2 ) THERE is no dispute that the Trust falls within the provisions of sec. 88 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ). A certificate has also been granted by the Collector to the Trust under sec. 88-B (2) of the Act with the result that certain provisions of the Act including the provisions of sec. 32-G were not applicable to the properties held by the Trust. ( 3 ) HOWEVER the present petitioner who is also admittedly a tenant of the Trust made an application before the Mamlatdar and Agricultural Lands Tribunal Choriyasi Prant Surat for the purchase of land in his possession. The Mamlatdar held proceedings under sec. 32-G of the Act. One Sorabji Rustomji Katpitia Secretary of the Parsi Panchayat Board Surat attended the proceedings on 27-1-1975 before the Mamlatdar when his statement was recorded. He stated therein that the Trust was ready and willing to sell the land in question to the petitioner and the Mamlatdar may therefore determine the sale price thereof according to law. In view of the said statement the Mamlatdar passed an order fixing the sale price of the land in question. ( 4 ) THE Trust having come to to know about the said order of the Mamlatdar preferred an appeal before the Assistant Collector Choryasi Prant Surat which was dismissed. The Trust thereupon held a revision application before the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal ). Before the Tribunal it was not disputed that the land in question belonged to the Trust. and the Trust was and is for the purpose of education; that the Trust has obtained a certificate under sec. 88-B of the Act and therefore provisions of secs. 32-G to 32-R of the Act were not applicable. However it was argued that the Trustees of the Trust had not raised any objection before the Mamlatdar and had agreed for fixation of the sale price of the land in question and therefore it was not open to them to challenge the decision of the Mamlatdar. 32-G to 32-R of the Act were not applicable. However it was argued that the Trustees of the Trust had not raised any objection before the Mamlatdar and had agreed for fixation of the sale price of the land in question and therefore it was not open to them to challenge the decision of the Mamlatdar. the Tribunal rejected the said contention and held that when it was established that the Trust was for educational purposes and when a certificate under sec. 88 of the Act had been obtained. the Mamlatdar had no jurisdiction to commence the proceedings under sec. 32-G of the Act. The Tribunal therefore allowed the revision applications of the Trust and set aside the judgments and orders of the authorities below. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order of the Tribunal the petitioner-tenant has filed this petition. ( 5 ) MR. S. N. Shelat learned Advocate for the petitioner has raised a contention that sec. 88-B of the Act exempts from the operation of secs. 32-G to 32-R of the Act the lands belonging to a Public Trust. However in the instant case the Secretary has in clear terms waived that exemption and has agreed for fixation of the sale price and therefore the Mamlatdar was right in passing the order which has been ultimately quashed and set aside by the Tribunal. In my opinion argument of Mr. Shelat is totally misconceived and cannot be accepted. ( 6 ) RELEVANT part of sec. 88-B material for our purposes reads:"88 (1) Nothing in the foregoing provisions except secs. 3 4 8 9 9 9 9 10 10 11 13 and 27 and the provisions of Chapters VI and VIII in so far as the provisions of the said chapters are applicable to any of the matters referred to in the sections mentioned above shall apply - (a) x x x x x (b) to lands which are the property of a trust for an educational purpose - a hospital Panjrapole or Gaushala". A plain reading of this provision shows that secs. 32-G to 32-R of the Act are not applicable to the lands belonging to a Trust. If the provisions are not applicable no proceedings can be commenced by the Mamlatdar under sec. 39 of the Act against a Trust. If the proceedings which are commenced are without jurisdiction. A plain reading of this provision shows that secs. 32-G to 32-R of the Act are not applicable to the lands belonging to a Trust. If the provisions are not applicable no proceedings can be commenced by the Mamlatdar under sec. 39 of the Act against a Trust. If the proceedings which are commenced are without jurisdiction. no amount of consent or waiver will invest a jurisdiction in an authority. ( 7 ) IN the instant case it is clear that the provisions of sec. 32-G of the Act being not applicable to the land of the Trust the Mamlatdar had no jurisdiction to commence the proceedings under secs. 32-G to 32-R of the Act and therefore what has happened subsequent to initiation of such ultra vires proceedings are of no consequence and are invalid and void. I do not find any error committed by the Tribunal so as to invoke my inherent powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. According to me the Tribunal has rightly set aside the judgments and orders of the authorities below. I therefore see no substance in this petition. ( 8 ) THE petition is dismissed. Rule is discharged. there shall be no order as to costs in this petition. Petition dismissed. .