HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - B No. - 932 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. 1. Heard Sri Ram Prasad Dwivedi, learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for respondent nos. 1 and 2. 2. In the light of proposed order notice to private respondents is dispensed with. 3. By means of present writ petition the petitioner has challenged order dated 11.07.2025, passed by the Consolidation Officer, Ikauna, District - Shrawasti under Section 9A(2) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act. 4. Learned Standing Counsel has raised preliminary objection by stating that the impugned order has been passed by the Consolidation Officer under Section 9A(2) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act and statutory remedy of appeal before the Settlement Officer (Consolidation) under Section 11(1) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act is available to the petitioner. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has opposed the aforesaid submissions made by learned Standing Counsel, stating that though remedy of appeal exists, but, in the present case there was lot of pressure upon the authorities and consequently filing appeal against the impugned order would be an empty formality. By means of impugned order objections of petitioner have been rejected and the matter has been Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ruby Maurya, Ram Prasad Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Pankaj Gupta Karbala Committee Tajiya Dafangah, Ikauna, Pargana, Tehsil, Shrawasti Thru.Chairman Mohammad Haneef .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Collector, Shrawasti And Others .....Respondent(s) decided in favour of applicants/private respondents. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 7. This Court finds that statutory remedy of appeal is available to the petitioner, where he can place all the material before the appellate authority and in the matter were statutory remedy is prescribed by way of special enactment, then parties should be relegated to the statutory remedy, rather then entertaining writ petition directly, without there being any extraordinary reason for entertaining the same. 8. Accordingly, this Court finds that the grounds raised by the petitioner can be adequately considered and appreciated by the appellate authority in appeal before the Settlement Officer (Consolidation), therefore, present writ petition is dismissed on the ground of availability of alternate remedy. September 24, 2025 A. Verma WRIB No. 932 of 2025 2 (Alok Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANURAG VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench