Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:46603 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 7383 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ambika Prasad And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt., Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ramesh Chandra Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dilip Kumar Pandey Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard Sri Ramesh Chandra Gupta, learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. By means of present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Nighasan, Lakhijpur Kheri passed U/S 67A of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. 3. At the very outset, learned Standing Counsel has submitted that petitioner has a remedy of filing a revision U/S 210 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. 4. Learned counsel for petitioner on the other hand has submitted that in all the matters where a revision can be filed have been detailed in the third schedule of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. He submits that a perusal of the third schedule would indicate that Section 67A has not been mentioned and therefore no revision would lie before the Commissioner / Board of Revenue. 5. It is noticed that as far as Section 210 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 is concerned, the only condition mentioned for filing a revision are that the matter against which a revision is proposed where no appeal lies and such suit or proceedings appeared to have : (a) exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law; or (b) failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested; or (c) acted in the exercise of such jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity, 6. Accordingly, Section 210 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 is a code in itself and reading of the third schedule where under the heading, it has been clearly mentioned that the same relates to Section 206, 207 & 208 and therefore necessary implecation Section 210 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 has been excluded from the operation of the third schedule. 7. Accordingly, this Court finds that the petitioner has an efficacious remedy of filing a revision U/S 210 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 before the Commissioner / Board of Revenue. 8. Learned counsel for petitioner at this stage does not object to the preliminary objection raised and submits that he may be permitted to withdraw this writ petition with a liberty to file a revision before the appropriate forum U/S 210 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. 9. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. 10. It is further provided that in case the revision is filed within two weeks from today, the concerned authority shall consider and decide the same with expedition in accordance with law. (Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 11.8.2025 Ravi/ Digitally signed by :- RAVI SHANKAR SRIVASTAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench