HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - B No. - 3899 of 2025 Court No. - 55 HON'BLE CHANDRA KUMAR RAI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Satendra Bhushan Dubey, learned standing counsel for the state-respondents and Sri Pradeep Singh, learned counsel for the respondent-gaon sabha. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:- "1. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari, quashing the impugned order dated 6.5.2025, contained as (Annexure-No.7) to this writ petition, passed by the Hon'ble Board of Revenue U.P. at Prayagraj (Respondent No.2) in Civil Revision No.253 of 2025 (Ramraj Versus Ram Sagar) under Section 208 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding the respondent authorities not to interfere in cultivating the crops over the property in question of his share. III. Issue any other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case to meet the ends of justice." 3. Counsel for the petitioner states that in a suit for partition, preliminary as well as final decree were prepared. He submitted that appeal was allowed, setting aside the judgment and decree passed Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ashok Kumar Mishra, Dharmendra Kumar Mishra, Neeraj Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Pradeep Singh Ram Sagar .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) by the trail court and the matter was remitted back before the trial court to decide the proceeding regarding kurra/faat afresh. He submitted that against the remand order passed in appeal, revision has been filed before the Board of Revenue which is pending. He submitted that order dated 6.10.2025, entertaining the revision should be set aside and the matter should be decided in pursuance of the order of the Additional Commissioner. 4. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the records. 5. There is no dispute about the fact that revision filed by the private respondent against the remand order passed in appeal by the Additional Commissioner, is pending before the Board of Revenue as Revision No.253 of 2025. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent no.2/Board of Revenue, U.P. at Prayagraj to decide the Revision No.253/2025, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 3 months, from the date of production of a certified copy of this order before the authority concerned, after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, in accordance with law. October 15, 2025 C.Prakash WRIB No. 3899 of 2025 2 (Chandra Kumar Rai,J.) Digitally signed by :- CHANDRA PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- CHANDRA PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad