BALE SINGH Vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Arvind Srivastava for the petitioners, Standing Counsel for the State of U.P. and Sri Rakesh Kumar Srivastava for the respondent-3.

(2.) By the impugned order, it has been held that the Revenue Courts have no jurisdiction to correct the error crept in CH Form 45, prepared during consolidation operation. Sec. 27(3) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 provides as follows: -

(3.) Thus, according to the provisions of Sec. 27(3), the Collector is not only authorised to maintain the record prepared during consolidation, but he is also authorised to correct any mistake crept in it.