Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:40431 Court No. - 6 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 4145 of 2025 Petitioner :- Kaushal Kisor And 2 Others Respondent :- Settlement Officer Of Consolidation, Ayodhya And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard Ms. Neetu Mishra holding brief of Sri Ajay Kumar Pandey for the petitioners and the Standing cousenl for respondent No.s 1 and 2. 2. In view of the proposed order notice to private respondents is dispensed with. 3. By means of the present petition the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- "a. Direct the opposite party no.1 to consider and decide the Transfer Application No.68/2025, under Rule -65 (1) of U.P. C.H. Rules expeditiously and further direct the opposite party no.2 to not finally decided the matter till the disposal of transfer application, in the interest of justice. 4. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the present dispute pertains to the property of Ram Baran son of Jagannath where objections were filed under Section 9-A(2) of U.P.C.H.Act on 10.10.2011. The objection filed by the petitioner were rejected by the Consolidation Officer, Milkipur, District Ayodhya on 30.4.2021 against which the petitioners filed application for recall. In the aforesaid circumstances, opposite party No.3 had filed writ petition before this Court bearing A-227 No.2299 of 2023 (Anantram Vs. Consolidation Officer, Milkipur and others) which was disposed of by means of order dated 5.5.2023 directing the Settlement Officer of Consolidation to decide the proceedings of case NO.770+1101/2020-21 most expeditiously after affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties to the litigation within a period of one year from the date a certified copy of that order is placed before him. It seems that the matter could not be decided and accordingly contempt proceedings have also been initiated in contempt application (Civil) No.1756/2025 where notices have been issued. It is in aforesaid circumstances it seems that an application for transfer has been moved by the petitioner on 1st July, 2025 and by means of the present petition a direction has been sought to decide the said case, expeditiously. 5. It is noticed that hardly two weeks' time has lapsed since filing the said application. Apart from the above, we find that the photo identification has been issued by this Court where the petitioner himself was present on 2nd July, 2025 i.e. on the very next date when the application for transfer was filed. Proceedings before the authorities can be expedited by this Court in exercise of the powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India where it is found that the proceedings are pending for extremely long length of time and any extraordinary circumstances is made out which may require expeditious disposal of the application /petition of the petitioner. Merely after 24 hours the present petition was prepared and filed and accordingly there is no extraordinary circumstances stated in the petition which may indicate any necessity for issuing any direction as prayed by the petitioner for expeditious disposal of the application for transfer. 6. Accordingly, in the aforesaid circumstances, no ground for interference is made out. Undoubtedly, the authority shall proceed in accordance with law and decide the said applicaditon. No direction is required to be passed at this stage. The petition is accordingly dismissed. (Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 15.7.2025 RKM. Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench