Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:54519 Court No. - 50 Case :- WRIT - B No. - 1376 of 2025 Petitioner :- Rashmi And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of Uttar Pradesh And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ayub Khan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sunil Kumar Singh Hon'ble Chandra Kumar Rai,J. 1. Heard Mr. Ayub Khan, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Rajesh Kumar Srivastava, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.6/ gram panchayat. 2. The instant petition has been filed for the following relief: "issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certioari quashing the impugned order dated 6.12.2024 passed by learned Deputy Director of Consolidation/ Additional District Magistrate (F/R), Baghpat/ respondent no.2 in Revision No.0127 of 2024, Computerized Case No.20245411800000127 (Smt. Shanti Devi vs. Gram Sabha), under Section 48 (3) of U.P.C.H. Act 1953 and order dated 8.10.2024 passed by learned Consolidation Officer, Baraut, Bhagpat in Case No.0094/ 2024, Computerized Case No.20245411880040094 (State vs. Gram Sabha), under Section 9A (2) of U.P.C.H. Act, 1953 vide (Annexure No.01 & 02 to the writ petition." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the order passed by the Consolidation Officer in respect to the plot in question is wholly illegal as under the order of Consolidation Officer the right of the passage of the petitioner has been interrupted. He further submitted that against the order of Consolidation Officer, revision under Section 48 of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 was filed by Shanti Devi and Others, which has been dismissed under the impugned order. He further submitted that both the impugned orders should be set aside and matter should be sent back before the Consolidation Officer to consider the matter afresh considering the case of the petitioners in proper manner. 4. Learned Standing Counsel and learned Counsel for the respondent no.6/ gram panchayat submitted that the petitioners have not filed any appeal or revision against the order of Consolidation Officer, as such, the instant petition at the instance of the petitioner cannot be entertained. They further submitted that Shanti Devi/ respondent no.4 of the instant petition has filed the revision which has been dismissed under the impugned order dated 6.12.2024, as such, the instant writ petition at the instance of the petitioners cannot be entertained. 5. I have considered the argument advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 6. There is no dispute about the fact that the revision filed by the private respondent no.4 has been dismissed under the impugned order dated 6.12.2024 and the instant petition has been filed on behalf on behalf of the petitioners. 7. Considering the fact that the petitioners have not filed any recall application, appeal or revision against the order of Consolidation Officer dated 8.10.2024, as such, the instant petition before this Court at the instance of the petitioner cannot be entertained. 8. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the instant writ petition filed on behalf of the petitioners is dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to initiate proper proceeding against the order dated 8.10.2024 passed by Consolidation Officer in accordance with law. Order Date :- 15.4.2025 Rameez Digitally signed by :- RAMEEZ AHMED High Court of Judicature at Allahabad