HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 6257 of 2025 Court No. - 6 HON'BLE JASPREET SINGH, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Notice on behalf of the respondents No.1 has been accepted by the office of the Chief Standing Counsel. In view of the order proposed to be passed by this Court, notice to the private-respondent No.2 is dispensed with. By means of the instant petition, the petitioner seeks expeditious disposal of Revision No.357 of 2025 (Case No.0100 of 2023; Computerized Case no.202354041200000100 filed under Section 48(1) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Rules, 1953 pending before respondent no.1. It is submitted that though a large number of dates have been fixed, however, for the reasons beyond control, the matter has not yet been decided. Learned standing counsel has drawn the attention of the Court to the extract of the order-sheet and has pointed out that in majority of the dates, the proceedings before the respondent could not advance on account of the resolution passed by the Members of the Bar abstaining from judicial work. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready to furnish an undertaking that the petitioner will not seek any unnecessary adjournment and shall also cooperate in the early disposal of the aforesaid case. Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that no gainful purpose will be served in keeping the aforesaid petition pending rather ends of justice can be served by directing the respondent No.1 to consider and decide the Revision No.357 of 2025 (Case No.0100 of 2023; Computerized Case no.202354041200000100) most expeditiously, after affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties, but without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties preferably as expeditiously as possible. The petitioner shall also furnish an undertaking, as mentioned above, along with a copy of this order. In case, if the petitioner does not furnish the aforesaid undertaking, then the petitioner shall not be entitled to the benefit of this order. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Shailendra Kumar Tiwari, Abhishek Shukla Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Satrohan @ Satrohan Prasad .....Petitioner(s) The Court Of Deputy Director Of Consolidation, Barabanki And Another .....Respondent(s) It is made clear that the Court has not examined the case of either of the parties on merits and the respondent No.1 shall decide the matter strictly in accordance with law. With the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of. October 17, 2025 Harshita A227 No. 6257 of 2025 2 (Jaspreet Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- HARSHITA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench