Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:35646 Court No. - 2 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3815 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ram Pal Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue U.P. Lko. And 12 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Himanshu Shukla,Vikas Kumar Agrawal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Aishwarya Pratap Singh,Dilip Kumar Pandey,Madhav Chaturvedi,Sandeep Kumar(Trivedi) Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard Sri Vikas Kumar Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Raj Bux Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel representing the State-opposite party Nos.1, 2, 3 and 5, Sri Dilip Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for opposite party No.4 and Sri Madhav Chaturvedi, learned counsel for private opposite party Nos.6 to 13. 2. By means of the instant petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought quashing of an interim order dated 16.05.2025 passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sarojni Nagar, Lucknow in Case No.17221/2025 (Smt. Sarita & Ors. vs. Rampal and Ors.) under Section 144 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 whereby the Sub Divisional Magistrate has restrained the petitioner from raising any construction, altering the nature of and selling the property in dispute i.e. land bearing Khasra No.544 measuring 0.5430 hectare village Bani, Pargana Bijnor, Tehsil Sarojni Nagar, District Lucknow. 3. Learned counsel for private opposite parties has raised a preliminary objection that the petition has been filed against an ex parte interim order and the petitioner has got an opportunity to file an application for vacation of the order before the Sub Divisional Magistrate. 4. In response to the aforesaid preliminary objection, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the Sub Divisional Magistrate has passed the order without jurisdiction and the private opposite parties are disturbing in the petitioner's possession on the strength of the impugned order dated 16.05.2025 and, therefore, the petitioner has invoked the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court. 5. Regarding filing of an application for vacation of the order dated 16.05.2025, it has been stated in paragraph 15 of the petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, that the petitioner tried to file objections on 13.05.2025 but instead of accepting the objections, the matter has been fixed for 02.07.2025. It has also been stated in the aforesaid paragraph that in the garb of interim protection, the opposite party Nos.6 to 13 are pressurizing the petitioner to vacate the land in question. 6. The stay vacation application or an application for rejection of the plaint can be filed in the office of the Sub Divisional Magistrate on any date even if it is not a date fixed for hearing in the matter. There is no averment that the petitioner has tendered an application for vacation of the impugned order dated 16.05.2025 to the concerned official of the court of Sub Divisional Magistrate on any date after 13.05.2025 and the concerned official has declined to accept the application. 7. Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has made a statement that in case the petitioner tenders an application for vacation of the order dated 16.05.2025 or he tenders any other application to the concerned official of the court of Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sarojini Nagar, District Lucknow, the same shall be accepted, placed before the Authority concerned and dealt with in accordance with law. 8. Sofar as the apprehension that the petitioner's possession will be disturbed in the garb of interim order dated 16.05.2025, the order dated 16.05.2025 merely restrains the petitioner from raising any construction, changing nature of the property or entering into any transaction of sale and purchase. The order does not provide for dispossession of the petitioner from the land in dispute. Therefore, the apprehension that the petitioner's possession may be disturbed in the garb of the order dated 16.05.2025, does not appear to have force. 9. When the petitioner has got an opportunity to file an application for vacation of the ex parte interim order dated 16.05.2025, this Court does not find it a fit case to exercise its supervisory jurisdiction for vacation of the ex parte interim order dated 16.05.2025. 10. The writ petition is dismissed leaving it open to the petitioner to file suitable application before the Sub Divisional Magistrate concerned. In case such an application is filed within a period of one week from today, the Sub Divisional Magistrate concerned shall proceed to decide the same expeditiously, in accordance with law without granting any unnecessary adjournment to any of the parties. (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.) Order Date :- 16.6.2025 Shubhankar Digitally signed by :- SHUBHANKAR THAKUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench