JUDGMENT : 1. The controversy involved in these petitions is whether an appeal against the order passed by the Estate Officer under the Rajasthan Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1964 (for short, "the Act of 1964") lie before the District Judge under Section 9 of the Act of before the Waqf Tribunal. 2. It is conceded at bar that the matter is covered by the decision rendered by the Apex Court in Ramesh Gobindram (dead) through LRs v. Sugra Humayun Mirza Wakf, which the Apex Court laid down the law regarding eviction of tenant occupying Waqf property and held that the Waqf Tribunal cannot adjudicate upon disputes regarding eviction of tenant and the Civil Court has the jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate upon the disputes regarding eviction of tenant from Waqf property. The Apex Court has explained the scope of Section 6(5), 83 and 85 and over rules certain judgments. 3. In view of the aforesaid decision, it is not disputed that the appeals against the order passed by the Estate Officer under the Act of 1964 is maintainable before the District Judge. 4. Accordingly the reference is answered in the manner that the appeals against the order passed by the Estate Officer under the Act of 1964 is maintainable before the District Judge under Section 9 of the Act of 1964. 5. The impugned orders passed by the District Judge/Additional District Judge returning the appeals are set aside. The District Judge concerned shall entertain the appeals on being presented and decide the same in accordance with law.Petitions allowed.