HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 32812 of 2025 Court No. - 4 HON'BLE AJIT KUMAR, J. HON'BLE SWARUPAMA CHATURVEDI, J. 1. Heard Sri Naveen Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State, Ms. Antima Rajbhar, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri Hari Prakash Tiwari, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 5 and perused the record. 2. By means of this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, petitioner has prayed for a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 30.08.2025. 3. According to the petitioner, once a civil suit has been instituted against private respondents, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate was not justified in passing order dated 30.08.2025 permitting the on-going constructions upon a disputed land. However, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that soon after filing of this petition, Sub-Divisional Magistrate has come to recall his order on 16.09.2025 on the ground that the matter was pending before civil court. 4. Learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 5 has submitted before the court that in the plaint case petitioner was not been able to prescribe the exact number of land except for the plaint map that has been given in foot of the plaint. He submits that since there was no plot number given in the entire plaint itself to identify the land, plaintiff is liable to be non-suited. She has further taken the court to the order passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Azamgarh directing the parties to maintain status quo, which according to Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Naveen Kumar Srivastava, Sameer Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Hari Prakash Tiwari Brijesh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) her, is an order beyond competence of the authority as a civil suit is going on between the parties and any relief could have been granted only by the civil court. 5. Upon a pointed query being made, learned counsel appearing for petitioner could not demonstrate from the plaint as to what is the plot number upon which he has set up his claim except the fact that there is a map given in foot of the plaint. From perusal of the plaint map, we find it to be only a 'naksha nazri', a hand sketch map and hence, prima facie, we find there to be a serious dispute between the litigating parties in a civil court regarding possession of land. Admittedly, when the civil suit is being contested by the parties, the Commissioner had no business to interfere in the matter and entertain any application made by either of the parties, so also Sub-Divisional Magistrate does not enjoy any authority to pass any order which may amounts to an order in the nature of temporary injunctions. We appreciate that better sense prevailed in the mind of Sub-Divisional Magistrate and he withdrew his order on 16.09.2025. 6. In the circumstances, therefore, the order passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Azamgarh dated 04.09.2025 is also rendered unsustainable. Hence, while we disposed of this petition with a direction to the petitioner to seek appropriate relief in the pending suit, we find it necessary to put the order dated 04.09.2025 in abeyance during pendency of suit proceedings. 7. In the circumstances, we put the order dated 04.09.2025 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Azamgarh in abeyance to abide by final outcome of temporary injunction application pending before the trial court. 8. Both the parties are directed to appear before the trial court and contest the matter of injunction. 9. This petition thus stands disposed of accordingly. October 9, 2025 #Vikram/- WRIC No. 32812 of 2025 2 (Swarupama Chaturvedi,J.) (Ajit Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad