Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:13926-DB Court No. - 9 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 2045 of 2025 Petitioner :- Shilpi Singh Chauhan Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Special Secy. Deptt. Geology And Mining (Concession),Lko And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Shishir Chandra,Vishnu Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J. Hon'ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing counsel for the State Respondents. 2. This petition has been filed with the following main prayers:- "i. Issue a writ or order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 31.01.2025 passed by respondent no.1 in Mines Revision No.07(R) G& M (UP)/2024 [Re. Smt. Shilpi Singh Chauhan Vs. District Magistrate, Lakhimpur Kheri] (as contained in Annexure No.1) in so far as it pertains to rejection of 'Application for Interim Relief' filed along with revision; in an utterly illegal, arbitrary & pre-determined manner. Issue a writ or order or direction in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondent no.1 i.e. the Revisional Authority in terms of Rule 80 of the Uttar Pradesh Minor Mineral (Concession) Rules, 2021 to hear and decide statutory Mines Revision No.07 (R) G&M (UP)/2024 [Re. Smt. Shilpi Singh Chauhan Vs. District Magistrate, Lakhimpur Kheri] expeditiously; within a time stipulated, in the interest of justice. Issue a writ or order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent No.2 not to give effect to the order No.1994/Khanij/ Khanan Patta-Shirva Shivpuri/2024; dated 28.11.2024, passed by District Magistrate, Lakhimpur Kheri (as contained in Annexure No.02) for effecting recovery against the petitioner, till the disposal of Mines Revision No.07(R)G & M(UP)/2024 [Re. Smt. Shilpi Singh Chauhan Vs. Commissioner, Kheri], before respondent No.1." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the Revision having been admitted, the application for interim relief has been rejected arbitrarily and no further date with regard to hearing of the Revision has been set by the Revisional Authority. 4. Having gone through the petition, we are of the opinion that since the Revision is pending before the Statutory Authority, it would be appropriate that a direction is issued to the Statutory Authority to decide the Revision at the earliest. We, therefore, without entering into the merits of the case, dispose of this petition, with a direction to the Revisional Authority to decide the Revision itself within a period of six weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him. Order Date :- 7.3.2025 Rahul Digitally signed by :- RAHUL TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench