Ritu Raj Awasthi, J. - (1.) Heard learned Counsel for petitioners as well as learned Standing Counsel for opposite party Nos. 1 and 2. This writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 28.4.2015 passed by the opposite party No. 1/Additional Commissioner (Judicial), Faizabad Division, Faizabad in the proceedings under Sec. 219, U.P. Land Revenue Act. As per the impugned order a case No. 31, under Sec. 33/39 U.P. Land Revenue Act was filed by the petitioners/applicants before the Sub Divisional Officer, Beekapur, Faizabad for correction. The said case was decided on merit vide order dated 14.2.2005 and the case filed under Sec. 33/39, U.P. Land Revenue Act was rejected. Thereafter an application for amendment dated 16.2.2005 was preferred by the petitioners/applicants on the ground that the name of the petitioner finds place in Fasli 1381 -1386 and the said fact has not been mentioned in the case filed under Sec. 33/39, U.P. Land Revenue Act, as such the order dated 14.2.2005 may be recalled and necessary amendment be made. The learned Sub -Divisional Officer, Beekapur, Faizabad vide order dated 13.1.2006 had allowed the said application, which, in fact amounts to recall/review of his earlier order. The revision preferred against the said order by the respondent No. 3 was allowed by the impugned order dated 28.4.2015 which is under challenge in the present writ petition.
(2.) Learned Counsel for petitioners submits that Sec. 202 of U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 clearly provides power to any revenue Court to correct any error or omission in its order within 90 days either of his own motion or on the application moved by the party.
(3.) It is submitted that the fact that name of the petitioners appeared in the revenue records of Fasli 1381 -1386 was not considered while rejecting the application filed under Sec. 33/39, U.P. Land Revenue Act; and as such the learned Court below was fully empowered to make necessary amendment in its order in exercise of powers under Sec. 202 of U.P. Land Revenue Act.;