HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - B No. - 808 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. 1. Heard Shri Pankaj Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Standing Counsel for respondents no. 1 to 3. 2. In view of the order proposed to be passed, notice to the private respondents no. 4 to 8, is dispensed with. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that Bhagwati Prasad son of Udai Raj was the recorded tenure holder and also seeks name of the petitioners to be mutated in the revenue record, while on the other hand the private respondents are claiming the right of sale deed on 14.2.1996. It is in the aforesaid circumstances that an appeal was preferred by the petitioners before the Sub Divisional officer, Akbarpur, District Ambedkar Nagar under Section 210 of the Land Revenue Act, where initially on 11.7.2018, the petitioners have filed the appeal before the respondent no.2 and as per the order dated 11.7.2018 he passed the interim order to not alienate the property in question but subsequently on the next date itself, on 12.7.2018 the interim order was vacated. 4. The petitioners being aggrieved by the order dated 12.7.2018, had preferred a revision before the Board of Revenue, wherein their interests were protected by means of the order dated 31.10.2018 but finally the revision has been rejected by means of impugned order dated 1.8.2025, which has been assailed in the present writ petition. While rejecting the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Pankaj Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Udai Pratap Singh And Others .....Petitioner(s) Board Of Revenue, U.P., Lucknow Thru. Member (Judicial) And 7 Others .....Respondent(s) revision, the revisional court has noticed that the appeal is pending consideration before the Sub Divisional Magistrate and it is only against the vacation of the interim order, the said revision was preferred and no infirmity was found in the order impugned therein and thereby the revision was rejected. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that it is on the strength of interim order dated 31.10.2018 that the petitioners have been cultivating the disputed land and submits that in case they are not protected they will not be able to cut the standing crops. 6. Learned Standing Counsel on the other hand submits that the grievances of the petitioners shall be substantially redressed, in case a direction is passed to decide the appeal with expedition and otherwise he also prays for dismissal of the writ petition stating that no infirmity can be found in the impugned order, passed by the Boar of Revenue. 7. Considering the over all facts and circumstances of the case, this Court has noticed that the appeal preferred by the petitioners is still pending consideration before Sub Divisional Magistrate since 2018. 8. Accordingly, the Sub Divisional Magistrate is directed to expedite the appeal preferred by the petitioners and decide the same expeditiously, within a period of three months from the date a certified copy of this order is produced, in accordance with law, after giving full opportunity of hearing to the parties. 9. Till the final order passed, the parties shall maintain the status-quo with regard to the disputed land as is existed today. 10. It is made clear that on passing of the appellate order, the protection granted to the petitioners shall cease to continue. 11. In view of the aforesaid observation the writ petition stands disposed of. August 28, 2025 Muk WRIB No. 808 of 2025 2 (Alok Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHD UMAR KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench