HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CIVIL MISC REVIEW APPLICATION No. - 111 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. Heard Sri Prasoon Srivastava, learned counsel for the review- applicant. 1. By means of instant review application the applicant has ought review of the judgment and order of this Court dated 20.8.2025. The applicant had assailed the order dated 24.4.2025 passed by Naib Tehsildar, Gonda in exercise of the powers under Section 34 of U.P. Revenue Code where he has proceeded to stay the previous order passed in favour of the applicant/petitioner at the behest of the private respondents. 2. This Court had dismissed the petition after taking into consideration the arguments raised by the petitioner specifically the provision of Para 492 of Revenue Court Manual where in such circumstances the applicant had the opportunity of moving appropriate application to discharge, vary or set aside the interim order. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the interim order was passed without giving an opportunity of hearing and also that it is in violation of clause 491 of Revenue Court Manual where Tehsildar cannot pass an order unless and until the delay is condoned. It seems that the aspect relating to passing of interim order without 4. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Prasoon Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Smt. Kalindi Tiwari .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Govt. Of U.P. Lko. And 4 Others .....Opposite Party(s) condonding the delay was nerved urged before this Court and this Court had decided the matter only taking into consideration the arguments of the petitioner and especially clause 492 of Revenue Court Manual. When a pointed query has been made to the applicant as to why even if in case the interim order passed by Naib Tehsildar is illegal and arbitrary, as urged by him, he still has appropriate remedy of filing application for recall in terms of clause 492 of Revenue Court Manual, no satisfactory explanation is forthcoming. Accordingly, this Court does not find any error apparent on the face of the record, especially the fact that it has already been considered that the applicant has remedy of moving appropriate application under Clause 492 of Revenue Code Manual. 5. For the aforesaid reasons, the application for review is rejected. 6. September 22, 2025 RKM. CMRA No. 111 of 2025 2 (Alok Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench