JUDGMENT Bhairo Prasad, Member. - This revision has been filed under section 333-A of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951 against the order of the Additional Moradabad Division, Moradabad dated 6.4.1990 passed in Revision against the order or Sub-Divisional Officer Hasanpur, district Moradabad dated 26.6.1989 passed in a restoration proceeding under Section 122-B (4-F)of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951. 2. In brief the facts of the case are that the revisionists are recorded over plot No. 893 area 25 decimal. During consolidation proceeding the new number of this plot was carved out 846 area 7 air. But the Sub-Divisional Officer also declared the revisionist as non-transferable Bhumidhar under Section 122-B (4-F) of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951. The Gaon Sabha moved application to set aside that order by engaging a private counsel. The Sub-Divisional Officer allowed the application of the restoration on 28.4.1989 and restored the proceeding. The revision was filed against that which was also rejected, hence this revision under Section 333-A of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties. Perused the record. 4. When the rights are confirmed under Section 122-b (4F) of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951 by the executive revenue authority that order can be challenged by filing a separate proceeding because i.e. not a judicial order, hence the order of both the courts restoring the proceeding is illegal. However plot No. 847 area 4 air is in possession of a school. The order of the Sub-Divisional Officer was ab-initio, illegal and Board has inherent power to correct the order of the lower functionaries of the Board. Therefore, this order cannot be allowed to remain being illegal. I, therefore, quash the initial order passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer under Section 122-B (4F) U.P.Act No. 1 of 1951 regarding plot No. 847 airs. Rest of the order is upheld and the restoration proceeding are quashed. The revision is decided accordingly.