Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:44831-DB Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 7284 of 2025 Petitioner :- Raju Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Special Secy. Deptt. Of Geology And Mining Lko And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Shishir Chandra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J. Heard. Similar writ petition bearing number Writ-C No.5019 of 2025 has been disposed of on 29.05.2025 in the following terms : "Heard. The revision of the petitioner has been filed within time and it has been admitted, a fact which is accepted by the learned Additional C.S.C. for the State. An application for interim relief was filed for staying the recovery in pursuance to the order impugned in the revision, the same is rejected on the ground that the petitioner was prima facie involved in illegal mining in violation of the patta and that no proof has been submitted, based on which, interim relief could be granted. Yet again the revisional authority has not considered the parameters for grant or refusal of interim relief. Once the revision has been filed within time and it has been admitted then the least that was required, was to put the recovery proceedings in abeyance till disposal of the revision. The reasons given in the impugned order are not at all in accordance with law. We, accordingly, quash the impugned order and dispose of the writ petition with the direction that the recovery proceedings shall remain in abeyance till disposal of the revision and a further direction to the revisional authority to decide the revision at the earliest, say, within two months. The petitioner shall co-operate in the revisional proceedings. " Similarity is on account of the fact that in that case also the interim relief application was rejected without considering the relevant parameters just as the case herein where the interim relief application has been rejected cursorily vide order dated 13.07.2025. Sri Rajesh Tiwari, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel says that he will ensure that such orders are not passed in future as apparently in an admitted revision the interim relief has been rejected by the impugned order dated 13.07.2025. Therefore, for the reasons already recorded in the above quoted order, this order is also liable to be quashed. The recovery proceedings in pursuance to the order impugned in revision shall remain in abeyance till disposal of the revision with further direction to the revisional authority to decide the revision at the earliest, say within two months. The petitioner shall cooperate in the revisional proceedings. If he does not do so, then it shall be open for the revisional authority to proceed ex-parte. The writ petition is disposed of. . [Manish Kumar,J.] [Rajan Roy,J.] Order Date :- 1.8.2025 S. Kumar Digitally signed by :- SANTOSH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench