JUDGMENT : G.B. Patnaik. J. 1. The short question which arises for consideration in this revision is whether the report of the Consolidation Amin submitted in course of a consolidation proceeding is a public document within the ambit of Section 74 of the Indian Evidence Act, or not. Such a question arose when the Defendants in course of the suit wanted to exhibit the said report and the Plaintiff raised objection to the admissibility of the document in question. The learned Munsif having overruled the objection on a conclusion that the document in question is a public document, the Plaintiff has filed this revision. 2. Mr. Das, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, contends that such a document does not come within the ambit of Section 74 of the Indian Evidence Act and the learned Munsif committed an error in coming to a contrary conclusion. In elaborating his argument, Mr. Das contends that the Amin cannot be held to be a public officer and therefore, the report submitted by him is not a public document. To test the correctness of the aforesaid submission, it is necessary to examine the provisions of the Orissa Consideration of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation of Land Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) as well as the Rules framed there under to find out whether there is any duty cast on the Amin to make such a report in course of a consolidation proceeding or not. 3. Section 6 of the Act confers power on the Assistant Consolidation Officer to prepare the map of each village in the consolidation area and to prepare a register known as the Land Register showing particulars of the land, interest therein, rent and cess settled therefor and such other details as may be prescribed. According to Mr. Das, the power having been conferred on the Assistant Consolidation Officer and there being no provision for an Amin to submit any report, the Amin is a busybody so far as the consolidation proceeding-is concerned and, therefore, such a report cannot have the authenticity of a public document. But on scrutiny of the provisions of the Act, the Rules and the instructions issued by the Board of Revenue, I filed that Amin has a duty to submit a report. But on scrutiny of the provisions of the Act, the Rules and the instructions issued by the Board of Revenue, I filed that Amin has a duty to submit a report. u/s 38 of the Act, the Board of Revenue has the powers to superintend and regulate all measures under the Act including issuance of instructions for the efficient and proper working of the provision of the Act. In exercise of the said powers, the Member, Board of Revenue, has issued instructions for the proper implementation of the scheme with reference to the statutory provisions and those instructions - have been complied as the Orissa Consolidation Manual. Paragraph- 33 of Volume-I of the said Manual clearly stipulates about the local enquiry to be made by Amin. It specifies that the Amin shall conduct local enquiry in presence of as many land-owners as may appear before him in response to the circulation of the list referred to in paragraph-131 and a report of enquiry shall be prepared by the Amin in form No. 27. For the purpose of such enquiry, the Amin shall be supplied in addition to the working copy of the map prepared and passed in accordance with instructions contained in paragraph-90 in Chapter-III and completed in all respects by the Recess Office of the Consolidation Officer as provided in Chapter-IV of the Manual along with copies of certain records for reference. The Consolidation Officer shall arrange to obtain much in advance by making out copies of those records available in the Collector's record room and the office of the Tahsildar and the office of the Settlement Officer, as the case may be. A catalogue of records numbering eleven has been provided thereunder. Thereafter a detailed procedure has been laid down as to the manner of enquiry which the Amin is required to make and ultimately submit the report in Form No. 27. Form No. 27 is a prescribed form under Appendix-A having different columns to be filled in by the said Amin. Therefore, I am of the view that under the statute, the. Amin has been vested with the duty of making enquiry and submitting his report in form No. 27 and such report must be a public document within the ambit of Section 74 of the Indian Evidence Act. It is a report prepared by a public servant in discharge of his. Amin has been vested with the duty of making enquiry and submitting his report in form No. 27 and such report must be a public document within the ambit of Section 74 of the Indian Evidence Act. It is a report prepared by a public servant in discharge of his. official duty in accordance with the instructim1s issued by the Member, Board of Revenue, for proper implementation of the consolidation scheme, the powers to issue such instructions having been derived u/s 38 of the Act. In this view of the matter, the contention of Mr. Das, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, is devoid of any substance and there is no infirmity in the impugned order. Accordingly, this Civil Revision is dismissed being devoid of merits. The interim order stands vacated. There will, however, be no order as to costs. Revision disrnissed. Final Result : Dismissed