Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:21922 Court No. - 7 Case :- WRIT - B No. - 342 of 2025 Petitioner :- Taaj Muhamamd Respondent :- Deputy Director Of Consolidation, Ayodhya And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashish Kumar Rastogi,Gaurav Singh,Rajan Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mohan Singh Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. Heard Shri Abhishek Kumar Rastogi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Hemant Kumar Pandey, learned Standing Counsel for the State/opposite party Nos. 1 to 3 as well as Shri Mohan Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party No.11/Gaon Sabha and perused the record. In view of order proposed to be passed, issuance of notice to the private opposite parties is hereby dispensed with. The instant petition has been preferred seeking following main relief:- "Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari, thereby quashing the impugned order dated 24.01.2024, passed by Deputy Director of Consolidation, Ayodhya, in Revision No.2354/202254042300000018 (Mohd. Shamim Versus Taj Mohammad), filed under section 48 of UP. Consolidation Act, 1953 (herein after referred as Act, 1953), by means of which the learned Deputy Director of Consolidation, Ayodhya, set aside the order dated 13.10.2022, passed by the Consolidation Officer, Sadar, Ayodhya." Considered the order dated 24.01.2024 and the explanation given in paragraph 23 of the present writ petition for approaching this Court after about 14 months and the fact that to substantiate the same no document has been filed by the petitioner before this Court, as also the fact that the main grievance which appears to this court relates to alienation/transfer or creating charge over the property in issue, which has not been refuted by learned counsel for the petitioner and also the fact that according to the learned counsel for the petitioner the application has already been preferred seeking interim protection with regard to the property in issue over which the parties are claiming their respective rights. Upon due consideration of the aforesaid, on being confronted, learned counsel for the petitioner says that justice would suffice if a direction is issued to the opposite party No.2/Consolidation Officer, Sadar, District Ayodhya where the matter is pending to consider and dispose of the application preferred by the petitioner seeking interim protection, within the time as stipulated by this court. To the aforesaid, learned counsel for the opposite parties have no objection. In view of the aforesaid, present writ petition is disposed of, without interfering the impugned order, with a direction to the opposite party No.2/Consolidation Officer, Sadar, District Ayodhya to consider and decide the application of the petitioner seeking interim protection, within a period of two months from the next date fixed before it. It is also open for the petitioner to prefer a fresh application seeking interim protection and in this situation the subsequent application only shall be considered and decided by the opposite party No.2/Consolidation Officer, Sadar, District Ayodhya within a period of two months from the date of preferring the application. 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. With the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 18.4.2025 ML/- Digitally signed by :- MUNNA LAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench