HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - B No. - 1033 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. 1. Heard Sri Saryu Prasad Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Standing Counsel for respondent no. 1. 2. In the light of proposed order notice to private respondent is dispensed with. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the private respondent had filed an appeal under Section 11 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act was filed after nearly nine years before the Settlement Officer Consolidation, Ayodhya. It is in the aforesaid circumstances prayer has been made in the present writ petition for direction to respondent no. 1 to decide the preliminary objection of the petitioners on the point of limitation and maintainability of the appeal, first, before deciding the appeal on merit. In support of his submissions, learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance on the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court rendered in Consolidation No. 6574 of 2016 - ram Prakash Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation, Hardoi and Others (decided on 03.02.2022). 4. Learned Standing Counsel on the other hand has opposed the writ petition. He has submitted that even the Division Bench of this Court in its judgment which has been relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioner had held that undoubtedly the aspect of delay and Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anshuman Pandey, Saryu Prasad Tiwari Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Salman Ali And 3 Others .....Petitioner(s) Settlement Officer Consolidation, Ayodhaya And Another .....Respondent(s) maintainability has to be decided before deciding the appeal on merits. But the Division Bench has added that both can be taken up on the same day and decided together. 5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties it is noticed that the appeal is pending, where the petitioners have raised preliminary objection regarding maintainability and has filed objection regarding delay. Undoubtedly, the appellate authority shall decided the aspect of maintainability and delay before proceedings to decide the appeal on merits. 6. This Court see no reason to issue direction in this regard and all the authorities are under mandate to consider and decide the proceedings pending before them in accordance with law. It is only when they decide the said matter contrary to the settled proposition of law, then interference can be made by this Court, but no orders directing any authority for deciding the preliminary objections first, can be passed merely at the instance of the opposite parties therein. 7. Subject to the aforesaid observations, this Court see no reason to pass any direction as sought by the petitioners in the present writ petition. 8. Accordingly, present writ petition being devoid of merits is dismissed. November 10, 2025 A. Verma WRIB No. 1033 of 2025 2 (Alok Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANURAG VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench