Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:16832 Court No. - 7 Case :- WRIT - B No. - 256 of 2025 Petitioner :- Khan Abu Talha And Others Respondent :- Deputy Director Of Consolidation, Bahraich And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Uma Shankar Sahai,Devraj Singh,Shashwat Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. 1. Shri Rajeev Kumar Tripathi, Advocate along with Shri Abhishek Shukla, Advocate have put in appearance on behalf of opposite party no.2 by way of filing their Vakalatnama, which is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material brought on record. 3. This petition has been filed seeking the following main relief :- "I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 18.09.2024 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Bahraich in Case/Revision No.0024/2020 (computerized no.2020530815000024) (Bhanu Pratap Verma Vs. Khan Abu Talha), as contained in Annexure No.1 to the writ petition." 4. After considering the observations made by opposite party no.1 -Deputy Director of Consolidation, Bahraich (in short 'DDC') in impugned order dated 18.09.2024 passed in Case No.0024 of 2020; Computerized Case No.2020530815000024 (Bhanu Pratap Verma Vs. Khan Ab Talha), instituted under Section 48(1) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (in short 'Act 1953'), whereby the opposite party no.1 admitted the revision and directed the parties to not alienate, transfer or create charge over the property in dispute, as also the observations made by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Mool Chand Yadav & another Vs. Raza Buland Sugar Company Ltd., Rampur and others, (1982) 3 SCC 484 and the observation made by this Court in the case of Radha Rani Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. Vs. U.P. State Cold Storage Tribunal & others, 2009 (27) LCD 1391, this Court finds that in the impugned order no interference is required. 5. At this stage, learned counsel for the parties stated that the dispute between the parties is related to the claiming rights over the land in relation to which the order was passed way back by the Assistant Consolidation Officer (in short 'ACO') on 08.08.1978, as such the the opposite party no.1-DDC may be directed to conclude the proceedings of the revision within time specified. 6. Taking note of the aforesaid, particularly, the period which starts from the initial order passed by ACO dated 08.08.1978, the DDC is directed to decide the revision after affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties to the litigation and without granting unnecessary adjournment to either party preferably within a period of four months from the next date fixed in the case. 7. It is made clear that the Court has not examined the case of either party on merits and the Authority concerned shall be free to decide the matter strictly in accordance with law. 8. With the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 24.3.2025 Anand/- Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench