HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 9105 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. 1. Heard Ms. Sameeksha Chadha, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel on behalf of respondents no. 1 to 3 and Shri Ajeet Kumar Mishra, Advocate holding brief of Shri Alok Kumar Misra, learned counsel for the respondents no.4. 2. The petitioner has assailed the validity of the order dated 05.08.2025 passed by Additional Commissioner (Judicial) Ayodhya Division, Ayodhya, whereby on a revision preferred by the private respondents, order of status quo has been directed to be maintained by the parties and the lower court record has been summoned. 3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the said revision was preferred against the order of the Chief Revenue Officer, Sultanpur dated 16.06.2025, which was in favour of the petitioner and on the basis of the said order, the petitioner has commenced construction over the disputed property. It has been submitted that subsequently, on passing of the order of status quo, the petitioner is unable to proceed with the construction and, therefore, submits that this order deserves to be set aside. 4. Counsel for the respondents opposed the petition and submitted that there was serious infirmity with the findings recorded by the Chief Revenue Officer and the same have been highlighted and pressed in the revision preferred before the Additional Commissioner. Counsel for the respondents has also informs this Court that the petitioner has already Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Sameeksha Chadha, Navneet Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Alok Kr. Misra Abdul Sattar .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. , Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) filed an application for recall of the order dated 20.08.2025, which is pending consideration before the revisional authority. 5. Considering the rival contentions, it is noticed that the revision is pending consideration before the Additional Commissioner, Ayodhya Mandal, where the petitioner has put in appearance. In the aforesaid circumstances, this Court would not in exercise of its discretionary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. We further find that once the petitioner has already assailed the validity of the order dated 05.08.2025 before the Additional Commissioner itself and the petitioner cannot assail the same order before this Court. Apart form the above, the petitioner has liberty to proceed and participate in the revisional proceedings and also considering the fact that the application for recall has already been filed, the petitioner would have full opportunity to assail the order dated 20.08.2025 before the revisional authority itself. 6. For the aforesaid reasons, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present petition. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. September 22, 2025 KR WRIC No. 9105 of 2025 2 (Alok Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- RABINDRA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench