Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:33376 Court No. - 7 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3519 of 2025 Petitioner :- Pitambar Respondent :- Board Of Revenue U.P. Lko. Thru. Its Member And 26 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar,Ashok Tiwari,Dinesh Kumar Srivastava,Urvashi Vishwakarma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dilip Kumar Pandey Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. Heard Ms. Urvashi Vishwakarma, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Sri Anurag Kumar Verma, learned State Counsel and perused the records. At the very outset, learned Counsel for the petitioner states that inadvertently the necessary opposite party could not be arrayed in the memo of petition and as such he may be permitted to delete one of the opposite parties i.e. opposite party no.12. Learned State Counsel has no objection to the prayer made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is permitted to delete the opposite party no.12 from array of the opposite parties, during the course of the day. In view of order proposed to be passed, issuance of notice to the private-respondent(s) is hereby dispensed with. The present petition has been filed for the following main relief:- "Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct to the opposite party no. 1 to decide the Revision No. 1114 of 2021, Under section- 333 U.P.Z.A. Act Pitambar Versus Ayodhya Prasad and others pending since 2021 in stipulated period, in the interest of justice." Considering the facts as stated, particularly the period of pendency of the revision, which appears to be pending since 2021 as also taking note of statutory provisions including para 458(2) of U.P. Revenue Court Manual, the present petition is disposed of with direction to opposite party no.1, to consider and decide the pending revision in issue i.e. Revision No. 1114 of 2021 (Pitambar Versus Ayodhya Prasad and others), most expeditiously, after affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties, but without granting any unnecessary adjournment, preferably within a period of six months from the next date fixed before it, if there is no other legal impediment in this regard. 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 :- 30.5.2025 Jyoti/- Digitally signed by :- JYOTI RAJWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench