HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 5386 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. 1. Heard Sri Pankaj Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for petitioner as well as Sri Anurag Kumar Maurya, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondent Nos. 1 to 3. 2. Vakalatnam has been filed by Sri Om Shankar Tiwari, Advocate on behalf of respondent No. 5 which is taken on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has challenged the order dated 05.07.2025 passed by Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Bakshi Ka Talab, Lucknow in proceedings U/S 104/105 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 whereby he has directed vesting of the disputed property situated at Gata no. 18 measuring 3200 sq.ft. with the State Government. 4. It has been submitted that the said land was initially recorded in the name of one Kalika who had executed a power of attorney in favour of one Musheer Ahmad on 27.02.1985 who in turn had sold the said land in favour of Rameshwaram Sahkari Grih Nirman Samiti Ltd. Lucknow by means of a registered sale deed. 5. The petitioner claims himself to be successor in interest of Kalika. The proceedings U/s 104/105 of U.P. Revenue Code have been initiated on account of the fact that Kalika who was undoubtedly belonging to scheduled caste category and the land of Kalika has ultimately been transferred in favour of Rameshwaram Sahkari Grih Nirman Samiti Ltd. Lucknow in violation of provisions contained in Section 166/167 of U.P. Revenue Code and consequently the said land would vest in the State Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Pankaj Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Namit Sharma Suresh Pal Yadav .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Collector, Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) Government. 6. Learned Standing Counsel on the other hand has raised a preliminary objection that against the order dated 05.07.2025 passed by Sub- Divisional Magistrate, the petitioner has an efficacious remedy of filing a revision U/S 210 of U.P. Revenue Code before the Commissioner/Board of Revenue. 7. Learned counsel for petitioner does not dispute the aforesaid facts and prays that he may be permitted to withdraw this petition with a liberty to the petitioner to file a revision before appropriate forum. 8. In light of the above, the writ petition is dismissed as not pressed with the aforesaid liberty. September 9, 2025 Ravi/ A227 No. 5386 of 2025 2 (Alok Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAVI SHANKAR SRIVASTAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench