Hon’ble Anjani Kumar Mishra, J.—Heard Sri Rahul Sahai, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri R.C. Singh, for the contesting respondent No. 2.

2. The writ petition arises out of proceedings under Section 33/39 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act and seeks quashing of the order dated 15.1.2016 passed by the Board of Revenue allowing a revision filed by the respondents.

3. The facts of the case briefly stated are that an entry was made by the Lekhpal in the khasra of non Z.A. land situated in Mauja Sahatwar Urf mahatpal, Pargana Khareed, Tehsil Bansdeeh, District Ballia. The petitioner instituted proceedings under Section 33/39 for expunging this entry alleging that the name of Vishwanath had wrongly been recorded under Class 15(2) in the khasra.

4. It appears that the respondent put in appearance but subsequently absented himself. The Sub Divisional Magistrate, Bansdeeh by his order dated 11.5.2000, directed that the entry made in the khasra be expunged.

5. The contesting respondent thereafter filed a restoration application which was rejected on the ground that since he had appeared in the proceedings initially but, subsequently absented himself, the restoration application was not maintainable.

6. Against the order rejecting the restoration application, the respondent preferred a revision. This revision has been allowed by the impugned order.

7. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the main grievance of the respondent was that the order passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, was ex parte. Under the circumstances, the revisional Court, should have remanded the matter back for passing a fresh order after hearing the parties. He has on the contrary terminated the proceedings after setting aside the order passed in favour of the petitioner, thereby maintaining the entry made in favour of the respondent in the khasra.

8. Apart from lengthy submissions made by learned counsel for the parties on the merits on their respective claims, the primary issue, which in my considered opinion, arises for adjudication is as to whether any entry made in the khasra in accordance with the provisions contained in Para A-60 of the Land Record Manual, is liable to be corrected by means of the proceedings under Section 33/39 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act.

9. In this context, it would be relevant to note the relevant provisions of the Act, namely Sections 33/39 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act, which are quoted herein above.

“33. The annual registers.—(1) The Collector shall maintain the record of rights and for that purpose shall annually or at such longer intervals as the State Government may prescribe, cause to be prepared an amended register mentioned in Section 32.

The register so prepared shall be called annual registered.

(2) The Collector shall cause to be recorded in the annual register—

(a) all successions and transfers in accordance with the provisions of Section 35; or

(b) other changes that may take place in respect of any land; and shall also correct all errors and omissions in accordance with the provisions of Section 39:

Provided that the power to record a change under clause (b) shall not be construed to include the power to decide a dispute involving any question of title.

(3) No such change or transaction shall be recorded without the order of the Collector or as hereinafter provided, of the Tehsildar or the Kanungo.

(4) The Collector shall cause to be prepared and supplied to every person recorded as bhumidhar, wither with or without transferable rights, assami or Government Lessee a Kisan Bahi (Pass Book) which shall contain-

(a) such extract from the annual register prepared under sub-section (1) relating to all holdings of which he is so recorded (either solely or jointly with others);

(b) details of grants sanctioned to him; and

(c) such other particulars as may be prescribed:

Provided that in the case of joint holdings it shall be sufficient for the purpose of this sub-section of Kisan Bahi (Pass Book)