1 Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:34027 Court No. - 7 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 5684 of 2025 Petitioner :- Dinesh Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Revenue Govt. Of U.P. Lko. And 8 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rakshit Raj Singh,Ayush Agarwal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rakesh Kumar Chaudhary Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Hemant Kumar Pandey, learned Standing Counsel for the State/opposite party Nos. 1 to 5 as well as Shri Rakesh Kumar Chaudhary, learned counsel for the opposite party No.9 and perused the record. 2. In view of order proposed to be passed, issuance of notice to the private respondents is hereby dispensed with. 3. The instant petition has been filed seeking following main relief (s) :- "(i) Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of certiorari thereby quashing the impugned order dated 20.05.2025 passed by the opposite party no. 2 in Case No. 3329/2024 as contained in Annexure No. 1 to this writ petition. ii. Issue any appropriate writ, order or direction thereby directing the Opposite Party No. 2 to reimpose the previous status quo order dated 08.04.2025 passed in Case No.3329/2024 and further direct the opposite parties concerned not to take any coercive measures against the petitioner in pursuance of the impugned order dated 20.05.2025." 4. By means of the order impugned dated 20.05.2025, the Additional Commissioner (Administration), Ayodhya Mandal, Ayodhya, has declined to extend the interim order dated passed on 08.04.2025 on the sole ground that the matter has been expedited by a Division Bench of this court for deciding the same on merits. The relevant portion of the order dated 20.05.2025 is extracted herein under :- "पत्रावली का अवलोकन किकया गया। यह किवकित हो रहा है किक प्रश्नगत वा के संर्भ में याची सुशील कु मार की ओर से मा० उच्च न्यायालय के समक्ष याचिचका सी संख्या 3786 ऑफ 2025, सुशील कु मार बनाम स्टेट ऑफ यू०पी० थ्रू प्रिंप्रसिस० सेके ० चि;पाट० ऑफ रेवेन्यू लखनऊ एण्; 8 अस योसि@त की गई। उक्त याचिचका में मा० उच्च न्यायालय द्वारा आेश किनांक 22.04.2025 पारिरत करते हुये 2 अपीलीय न्यायालय को प्रश्नगत वा का गुण ोष के आधार पर किवलम्बतम ो माह में किकये @ाने का किनLश किया गया है। चूंकिक प्रश्नगत अपील से सम्बन्धिन्धत अवर न्यायालय की पत्रावली प्राप्त हो चुकी है तथा मा० उच्च न्यायालय द्वारा प्रश्नगत अपील का किनस्तारण गुण ोष पर किकये @ाने हेतु किनLशिशत किकया गया है , अतएव उपरोक्त वर्णिणत तथ्यों व परिरन्धिस्थचितयों में प्रश्नगत अपील में इस न्यायालय द्वारा पूव पारिरत स्थगनाेश किनांक 08.04.2025 को बढ़ाये @ाने का कोई औचिचत्य नहीं रह @ाता है। तद्नुसार उक्त स्थगनाेश कि० 08.04.2025 को बढ़ाये @ाने सम्बन्धी प्रस्तुत प्राथना पत्र कि० 28.04.2025/05.05.2025 एवं 14.05.2025 किनरस्त किकये @ाते हैं। पक्ष सूचिचत हों। पत्रावली वास्ते उर्भय पक्ष की गुण ोष पर सुनवाई हेतु किनांक 30.05.2025 को पेश हो।" 5. Taking note of the admitted position that interim order was granted on 08.04.2025, after admitting the appeal, and the same has not been extended by the impugned order only on the basis of observations made by Division Bench of this Court in the order dated 22.04.2025 passed in Writ-C No.3786 of 2025. The order dated 22.04.2025 reads as under :- "1. Mr. Anurag Singh, learned Advocate has filed vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no. 7 which is taken on record. 2. Heard. 3. The appeal of the petitioner under Section 24 (4) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 is already pending wherein it is claimed that some interim order has been passed on 21.09.2024, however, Mr. Manish Mishra, learned Additional Standing Counsel has instructions to inform the Court that the order impugned in the said appeal was passed under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 by the Sub Divisional Magistrate concerned on 27.02.2019 and the Patthar Nasab took place on 23.11.2019 itself, thereafter the petitioner sought to disturb the pillars installed in compliance of the order dated 27.02.2019, therefore, the subsequent action has been taken. 4. The Additional Commissioner (Administration) where the proceedings under Section 24 (4) of the Code, 2006 are pending is directed to decide the appeal, positively, within two months. Petitioner can raise all pleas before the appellate authority. 5. The writ petition is disposed of." 6. It is apparent from the order dated 22.04.2025, quoted above, that the court has only directed the appellate authority/The Additional Commissioner (Administration) to decide the appeal positively within two months and this order does not indicate that on the date fixed, within the said period, the interim order would not be extended. 3 7. Accordingly, the order dated 20.05.2025, passed by the opposite party No.2/Additional Commissioner (Administration), Ayodhya Division, Ayodhya in Case No.3329/2024 (Computerized Case No.C202404000003329) is set aside. 8. The matter is remanded back to the opposite party No.2/Additional Commissioner, Administration, Ayodhya Division, Ayodhya to pass appropriate order on the application seeking extension of interim order after hearing the concerned parties as also taking note of the observations made by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Moolchand Yadav & Another v. Raza Buland Sugar Co. Ltd., Rampur and others, reported in (1982) 3 SCC 484 as also that the authority who can pass the final order can also pass interim order as held by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Vinod Kumar Bhalotia vs. State of U.P., reported in 2000 (18) LCD 532. 9. With the aforesaid, the writ petition stands is allowed. Order Date :- 30.5.2025 ML/- Digitally signed by :- MUNNA LAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench