NARAYAN SHUKLA,J - (1.) SUPPLEMENTARY affidavit filed today is taken on record. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Coun­sel.
(2.) ON the basis of lease granted by the Land Management Committee to the petitioner-institution as well as long tenure entry in the revenue record, the petitioner has challenged the order passed by the revenue authorities in exercise of power provided under section 33/39 of the Land Revenue Act, on the ground that under the provisions of that very section only the clerical error can be corrected, but substan­tial right of the petitioner cannot be taken away. In support of his submissions he also cited some decisions of the Board of Reve­nue as well as of this Court, which are quoted herein below: - (1) Janki Prasad v. Nand Kumar, 2004 (96) RD 151 (BR). (2) M/s. Mahalakshmi Land and Finance Co. (Private) Ltd. v. Board of Revenue, U.P., Lucknow and others., 1997 (15) LCD 273. (3) Smt. Saroj Singh and another v. Board of Revenue, Lucknow and others., 2008 (105) RD 698 (HC-LB). He further informs that though he has challenged the order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer and the Board of Reve­nue through the Revision No. 3084/LR/2009-10, but since he has a prima facie case he has approached this Court for dec­laration of his right for possession over the land in dispute during the pendecy of re­vision.
(3.) THE learned Counsel for the peti­tioner further informs that under the bonafide belief of his right, the petitioner has constructed the building also and a School after receiving recognition from the educa­tional body is running thereon.;