Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:35997 Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - B No. - 572 of 2025 Petitioner :- Umakant And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue U.P. Lko. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Prem Shankar,Mahendra Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi, J. 1. Heard Sri P. S. Bajpai, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Raj Bux Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel. 2. By means of the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the validity of the order dated 25.04.2025 passed by the Board of Revenue in Revision No.1413 of 2025 whereby the Board of Revenue has admitted the revision filed by the opposite party No. 5 and has stayed the order under challenge passed by the Additional Commissioner, Administration, Kanpur Division Kanpur. It is recorded in the impugned order dated 25.04.2025 that Sri Kshitij Saxena, Advocate had put in appearance on behalf of the caveator and made a statement that he had no instruction from the caveator. 3. Sri P. S. Bajpai, Advocate has filed objections which were taken on record. The revision was admitted after the perusal of the records. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that nobody was present on 25.04.2025 and the narration made in the impugned order dated 25.04.2025 that Sri Kshitij Saxena, Advocate had appeared on behalf of the caveator and had made the statement that he does not have any instruction from the caveator, is incorrect. 5. In State of Maharashtra Vs. Ramdas Shrinivas Nayak, (1982) 2 SCC 463, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the narrations made regarding happenings before the judicial forum by the Presiding Officer of the Court shall be deemed to be correct. In case a party contends that the happenings of the court have been recorded incorrectly, the only course open for him is to file an application before the same authority seeking review of the order. The narration of happenings before a court recorded in the order cannot be challenged before a higher court. 6. The petitioner has not filed any application before the Board of Revenue. In these circumstances, this Court cannot go into the correctness of the narration of the happenings of the court recorded in the impugned order. 7. The Board of Revenue has fixed the matter for 18.07.2025 and it will be open for the petitioners to appear before the Board of Revenue on the date fixed and make their submissions. 8. In view of the aforesaid discussions, there appears to be no merit in the petition. It is dismissed accordingly. Order Date :- 19.6.2025 (Manoj K.) Digitally signed by :- MANOJ KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench