Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:49426 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - B No. - 791 of 2025 Petitioner :- Kusum Tiwari Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief /Prin. Secy., Revenue, Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Prashant Pandey,Virendra Prakash Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Julfikar Ahmad Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard Sri Prashant Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for respondent nos. 1 to 3. Sri Abhishek Shukla, Advocate has filed vakalatnama on behalf of respondent no. 4, same is taken on record. 2. By means of present writ petition the petitioner has challenged the order dated 26.05.2025 passed by the Board of Revenue in exercise of power under Section 219 of the Land Revenue Act, 1901, whereby they have set aside order dated 26.10.2023, passed by the Tehsildar, Ramsanehighat, District - Barabanki, stating that the Tehsildar has passed the order in violation of Section 231 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 and accordingly, noticing the said infirmity has set aside the order and remanded the matter back to Tehsildar for decision afresh. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that infact proceedings were initiated in 2012 when the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 had not been brought into effect, it was brought into effect with effect from 11.02.2016. Accordingly, proceedings were filed under Section 34 of the Land Revenue Act, 1901. It is due to the error in the case title as the order of Tehsildar was transcribed under Section 134 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, the Board of Revenue has noticed only the heading of the said judgment rather then looking into the record from which it would have been clear that proceedings have been initiated under Section 34 of the Land Revenue Act, 1901. 4. It is in the aforesaid circumstances that the Board of Revenue was of the opinion that the Tehsildar has incorrectly exercised its jurisdiction and therefore set aside the order. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there is no dispute that the proceedings were initiated under the Land Revenue Act and revision against the said order was maintainable before the Board of revenue for going to remand the appeal has provided under Section 210 of the Land Revenue Act. 6. It is clear that discrepancy and incorrect appreciation of the factual matrix has occurred only on account of computer heading of the judgment of the Tehsildar dated 26.10.2023. 7. Accordingly, order dated 26.05.2025 passed by the Board of Revenue is arbitrary and is accordingly set aside. The matter is remitted back to the Board of Revenue to decide the matter afresh treating the impugned order dated 26.10.2023 passed by the Tehsildar had been passed in exercise of power under Section 34 of the Land Revenue Act, 1901. 8. This Court further takes note of the fact that there was no error in filing the revision before the Board of Revenue under Section 219 of the Land Revenue Act. 9. Let the revision be decided with expedition, say within six months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. 10. The parties undertake to cooperate in the proceedings before the Board of Revenue. 11. The writ petition stands allowed. Order Date :- 22.8.2025 A. Verma (Alok Mathur, J.) Digitally signed by :- ANURAG VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench