- (1.) ALLAH Raham, J. List revised. None respondes for the opposite party No. 2.
(2.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned A. G. A. It appears that on the report of the Naib-Tehsildar the date of death of one, Mata Prasad was entered as 8-11-1984 by the Sub- Divisional Magistrate. Opposite Party No. 2 moved a review application before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate for correction of date of death of Mata Prasad from 8-11-1984 to 18-11- 1984. The learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate rejected the review petition. Aggrieved against the said order, opposite party No. 2 preferred a revision before the Sessions Judge. The learned Sessions Judge allowed the revision and set aside the order dated 17-5-1999, passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and remanded the matter to Sub-Divisional Magistrate to decide it afresh, in the light of the provisions contained in Section 13 (3) of Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 (Act for short ). Aggrieved against the said order, the petitioners have approached this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(3.) THE contention of the petitioners' Counsel is that there is no provision of review in the Act. THE learned Counsel for the petitioners has read out the provisions of the Act and the Rules from which it is clear that there is no provision of review either in the Act or in the Rules. Similarly, a revision is also not provided under Section 23 of the Act. The learned Sessions Judge has undoubtedly acted and passed an order for which no jurisdiction is vested in him. The impugned order dated 10-12-2002 (Annexure-2) is clearly without jurisdiction and the same deserves to be quashed.;