DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, J. - (1.) Heard Sri Satya Prakash Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel representing the State- respondent nos.1 and 4 and Sri Ran Vijai Singh, learned counsel representing U.P. Power Corporation Limited.
(2.) Under challenge in this petition is an order dated 18.11.2004 passed by the Additional Commissioner (Administration), Devi Patan Division, Gonda whereby he is said to have reviewed earlier order dated 31.10.2000 and has set-aside the same.
(3.) Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that under the provision of U.P. Land Revenue Act (hereinafter referred to as 'Act'), there is no provision which permits the Additional Commissioner to review his own order. He has further stated that except for the Board of Revenue under Section 220 of the Act, no other court or authority under the said Act is empowered to review its own order. It has also been argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that in fact, the order dated 31.10.2000 passed earlier by the Additional Commissioner was perfectly lawful for the reason that it has elaborately dealt with the case of the petitioner which was based on an order passed by the Consolidation Officer on 24.02.1976 under Section 9-A (2) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act whereby the land in question, namely, plot no.4003/01 which has been assigned new number as 1375, having an area of 0.51 acre, situate in village Phulvariya, hamlet of Vishunapur, District Balrampur was ordered to be recorded in the name of the petitioner and the name of gaon sabha was ordered to be expunged. He has also stated that the said order dated 24.02.1976 was duly implemented and accordingly amaldaramad of the said order was made in CH Form 23, however while preparing CH Form 41 and 45, the Consolidation Lekhpal inadvertently did not incorporate the said order in the said forms which ultimately resulted in omission of the name of the petitioner in the revenue records which were prepared after consolidation operations were over. He has thus stated that it is in this background that the petitioner moved the application before the Sub-Divisional Officer under Sections 33/39 of the Act but the Sub-Divisional Officer rejected the said application cursorily by passing an absolutely cryptic order on 22.07.1999. He has further stated that the revisional order dated 31.10.2000 passed by the Additional Commissioner (Administration) Devi Patan Division, Gonda did not suffer from any illegality and irregularity whatsoever, which may have warranted the Additional Commissioner to have reviewed the said order and passed the order dated 18.11.2004, which is under challenge herein. ;