WPMS No. 849 of 2010 Hon’ble Tarun Agarwala, J. Heard Mr. Nagesh Aggarwal, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R.C. Arya, the learned Brief Holder for the State. The petitioner’s has filed a revision u/s 219 of the Land Revenue Act against the order of the competent authority passed u/s 33/39 of the Land Revenue Act. This revision was rejected by an order dated 18/05/2010 without hearing the petitioner. The revisional authority held that since forged entries were made in the revenue record, consequently, the petitioner was not entitled to be heard. In my opinion, the approach adopted by the revisional authority is patently erroneous. The question whether the records were forged and manipulated was required to be adjudicated and an opportunity was required to be given to the petitioner by the revisional authority to explain that the said entry was genuine. The revisional authority cannot decide the matter merely on the basis of the report submitted by the revenue authority. In view of the aforesaid, the impugned order dated 18/05/2010 passed by the revisional authority in revision No. 24 of 2007-08 is quashed. The writ petition is allowed. The matter is again remitted to the revisional authority to decide the matter afresh after hearing all parties concerned especially the petitioner. (Tarun Agarwala, J.) Dated 08.07.2010 Shiv