Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:12127 Court No. - 8 Case :- WRIT - B No. - 185 of 2025 Petitioner :- Rajeev Kumar Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue, Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Narendra Upadhyay,Harshit Singh,Ripu Daman Shahi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Notice on behalf of respondent nos.1 to 3 has been accepted by the office of the learned Chief Standing Counsel. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner had initiated proceedings under Section 38 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 which came to be allowed by means of order dated 3.4.2024. The same was put to challenge by the private respondent nos.4 to 13 by filing an appeal which came to be dismissed by means of order dated 16.10.2024. Thereafter, the private respondent nos.4 to 13 preferred a revision before the Board of Revenue wherein the revisional court by means of an order dated 22.1.2025 has entertained the revision after hearing the parties concerned and called for the record, issuing notice to the remaining unrepresented parties and by the same order, it also stayed the operation of the orders impugned in the revision i.e. dated 3.4.2024 which was affirmed vide order dated 16.10.2024. Submission is that while passing the order, there is no reason given nor there is any prima facie satisfaction recorded as to what prevailed in the mind of the courts to grant the interim relief and for the said reason, the order is bad. Having considered the aforesaid submissions and from perusal of the material on record, this Court finds that as far as the order dated 22.1.2025 admitting and issuing notice to the unrepresented respondents to the revision is concerned, the said order cannot said to be bad. As far as the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the order impugned does not reflect reasons, is a subject matter which is in the domain of the revisional court where the petitioner has already put in appearance and it has been informed that an application for vacation of interim order is already pending but the next date fixed by the Board of Revenue is 14.5.2025 i.e. almost after five months. Since the application for vacation of interim order is already pending before the the Board of Revenue, hence at this stage, this Court is not inclined to interfere. This Court permits the petitioner to move an application early listing/hearing by 18th of March, upon which the Board of Revenue shall prepone the date and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties but without granting any unnecessary adjournment shall decide the application for vacation strictly in accordance with law preferably within six weeks. It is made clear that the Court has not examined the plea of either of the parties on merits and the Board of Revenue shall decide the application for vacation of interim order, strictly in accordance with law. With the aforesaid observations, the petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 28.2.2025 Shukla Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH KUMAR SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench