Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:44933 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 6984 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ram Kewal Yadav And Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue, Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pratibhan Yadav,Ripu Daman Shahi,Santosh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dilip Kumar Pandey Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard Sri Ripu Daman Shahi, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Standing Counsel for respondent nos. 1 and 2. Sri Rakesh Kumar Srivastava, Advocate has filed vakalatnama on behalf of respondent no. 3, same is taken on record. 2. In the light of proposed order, notice to private respondent no. 3 is dispensed with. 3. The dispute in the present case pertains to Gata No. 0009, 52 and 48, situate at village - Bikapur, Pargana - Rokha, Tehsil - Salon, District - Raebareily, which according to the respondents was recorded in the name of one Ram Swaroop, which due to some typographical error came to be recorded in the name of Ram Sahai. Accordingly, proceedings for correction of the revenue records was initiated by the respondents. Respondent no. 3 is daughter of Ram Swaroop and claims title over the disputed land on the basis of succession, while petitioner are legal heirs of Ram Sahai and claim to be entitled to the disputed land on the basis of revenue entries. 4. In the present case, it is the correction application which is bone of contention which has been decided in favour of respondent no. 3. 5. Learned counsel for the parties have informed this Court that proceedings under Section 34 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as "the Code, 2006"), which is pending before the Naib Tehsildar, Salon, Raebareli, where substantial rights of the parties would be adjudicated as to the person whose name is to be mutated in the revenue records. 6. This Court does not find that present dispute shall be carried out any further and also do not propose to pass any order on the preliminary objection of the respondents that petitioners have efficacious alternate remedy of appeal under Section 38(4) of the Code, 2006, inasmuch as quietus to the dispute shall be determined only when necessary orders are passed under Section 34 of the Code, 2006. 7. Accordingly, after hearing the parties and with consent to learned counsel for the parties, present writ petition is disposed of with direction to Naib Tehsildar, Tehsil - Salon, District - Raebareli to conclude the proceedings initiated under Section 34 of the Code, 2006, as mentioned and noticed in the impugned order dated 26.06.2025, expeditiously, say within three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order, in accordance with law. 5. The parties undertake to cooperate in the proceedings before the Naib Tehsildar and shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment. 6. Till appropriate orders are passed by Naib Tehsildar in the proceedings under Section 34 of the Code, 2006, the parties shall maintain status quo over the land in dispute as it exists today. Order Date :- 4.8.2025 A. Verma (Alok Mathur, J.) Digitally signed by :- ANURAG VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench