HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 7482 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. 1. Heard Sri Dharmendra Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri Yogesh Kumar Awasthi, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondent. 2. In view of the order proposed to be passed, requirement of issuance of notice to private respondents are hereby dispensed with. 3. Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for direction to the respondent No. 1 - Consolidation Officer, Bikapur, Ayodhya, to decide Case No. 269 of 2017 (Computerized Case No. 2017550423030016) - Shiv Prasad Vs. Nokhai, under Section 9A(2) of the U.P Consolidation of Holdings Act, expeditiously. 4. It has been submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that the case is pending since 2017 and the order-sheet annexed by the petitioner indicates that no proceedings could take place due to call for boycott of the local bar association . The facts which are evident from the order- sheet indicates that there is frequent call by the local bar association which in fact is deprecated by this Court considering the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ex-Capt. Harish Uppal Vs. Union of India and another reported in 2003 (2) SCC 45 and it is noticed that even the application for mutation are not being considered and decided because of the call for boycott. 5. Such an action of the local bar association may amount to criminal contempt being a direct conflict with the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ex-Capt. Harish Uppal (supra) and this Court leave it open for the petitioner to invoke the said jurisdiction in case they are so legally advised. 6. The present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 1 - Consolidation Officer, Bikapur, Ayodhya to consider and decide Case No. 269 of 2017 (Computerized Case No. 2017550423030016) - Shiv Prasad Vs. Nokhai, under Section 9A(2) of the U.P Consolidation of Holdings Act, expeditiously, say, within a period of six months from the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dharmendra Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Madan .....Petitioner(s) Consolidation Officer, Bikapur, Ayodhya And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) date a certified copy of this order is produced before him in case there is no legal impediment and subject to cooperation of the petitioner. 7. Learned counsel for petitioner undertakes that petitioner shall appear on all the dates fixed before concerned authority irrespective of the call for boycott and in case any person creates impediment in appearance this Court grants him liberty to file an application for criminal contempt. 8. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. 9. The petitioner shall serve a copy of this order to the President and Secretary of local bar association for their compliance. December 19, 2025 A. Verma A227 No. 7482 of 2025 2 (Alok Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANURAG VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench