Reference to the Board.
The appellant felt aggrieved by the order dated May 4, 1993 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Kanpur and preferred revision before the Additional Commissioner, Kanpur Division, under Section 218 of the Act.
Not satisfied with the order of the Additional Commissioner, Kanpur Division, the appellant preferred further revision under Section 219 of the Act before the Board of Revenue.
The Sub Divisional Officer by his order dated May 4, 1993 remanded the matter to the Naib Tehsildar for fresh companysideration after giving opportunity to the parties.
The Additional Commissioner dismissed the appellants revision.
The Commissioner, the Additional Commissioner, the Collector, the Record Officer or the Settlement Officer may call for and examine the record of any case decided or proceedings held by any officer subordinate to him for the purpose of satisfying himself as to the legality or propriety of the order passed and as to the regularity of proceedings, and, if he is of opinion that the proceeding taken or order passed by such subordinate officer should be varied, cancelled or reversed, he shall refer the case with his opinion thereon for the orders of the Board and the Board shall thereupon pass such orders as it thinks fit.
The present respondents challenged the order of the Board of Revenue in a Writ Petition before the Allahabad High Court.
The Board of Revenue vide order dated 24.8.2009/1.9.2009 allowed the revision filed by the appellant, set aside the orders of the Additional Commissioner and the Sub Divisional Officer and restored the order of the Naib Tehsildar passed on May 4, 1992.
M. Lodha, J. Leave granted.
On May 4, 1992 Naib Tehsildar, Bithoor, Kanpur Nagar, allowed the application for mutation made by the appellant.
Aggrieved by the order of the Naib Tehsildar, the present respondents preferred appeal under Section 210 of Uttar Pradesh Land Revenue Act, 1901 for short, Act before the Sub Divisional Officer, Kanpur.
