HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - B No. - 666 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. 1. Heard Sri Jitendra Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Standing Counsel for respondent nos. 1 to 3 and Sri Ravi Shanker Singh, learned counsel for respondent no. 5, while respondent no. 6 is mother of the petitioners. 2. Counter affidavit filed by learned counsel for the respondent no. 5 is taken on record. 3. Petitioner in the present writ petition has challenged order dated 14.10.2025, passed by the the Deputy Director of Consolidation, whereby revision filed by the private respondents has been allowed. 4. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that in the said revision father of petitioners namely Ashok Kumar S/o Ram Araz was made respondent in the revision and the said revision was filed in 2024, while infact father of petitioners had died on 07.09.2022 and accordingly, assailed the validity of order dated 14.10.2025, stating that same has been passed against dead person. 6. Learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that they were not aware of the death of Ashok Kumar (father of petitioners) and accordingly could not take effective steps for substituting him before the Deputy Director of Consolidation or before the other revenue authorities, Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Jitendra Kumar Pandey, Ankit Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Mohan Singh, Raj Kumar Upadhyaya (R.K.Upadhyaya), Ravi Shanker Singh Dinesh Kumar Tiwari And Another .....Petitioner(s) Deputy Director Of Consolidation, Sultanpur And Others .....Respondent(s) but in any view of the matter, they do not dispute the fact that as per death certificate issued by the Gram Pradhan, Ashok Kumar died on 07.09.2022. 7. Accordingly, in the aforesaid circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that order dated 14.10.2025, passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation has been passed against dead person and deserves to be set aside. 8. In view of above, present writ petition is allowed. Impugned order dated 14.10.2025, passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Sultanpur is set aside. The matter is remanded to the Deputy Director of Consolidation to be decided afresh. 9. Revision preferred by the respondent no. 5 stands restored. Respondent no. 5 shall move appropriate application for substitution within next ten days. The petitioners who would be substituted instead of their father Ashok Kumar, undertake that they will file their objections within two weeks from today and the private respondents shall file their reply to the objections filed by the petitioners within two weeks thereafter, and pleadings shall be completed within one month from today. The Deputy Director of Consolidation is directed to decide the matter with expedition, say within six weeks thereafter, in accordance with law. 10. The parties undertake to cooperate in the proceedings before the Deputy Director of Consolidation and shall not take unnecessary adjournment. 11. With the consent of the parties, it is directed that they shall maintain status quo over the disputed property till orders are passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation. It is provided by this Court, that when final orders are passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, present order passed by this Court shall cease to have effect. August 28, 2025 A. Verma WRIB No. 666 of 2025 2 (Alok Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANURAG VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench