HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - B No. - 1012 of 2025 Court No. - 6 HON'BLE JASPREET SINGH, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Notice on behalf of respondent nos.1 and 2 has been accepted by the office of the learned Chief Standing Counsel. By means of the instant petition, the petitioner prays for the following reliefs:- "a. To issue a writ order or direction in the nature of CERTIORARI, quashing the order passed by the C.O. dated 19/02/2025 annexed herewith as Annexure no. 1. b. To issue a writ order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS, directing/commanding Assistant Consolidation Officer, Bahraich to comply with the DDC's order dated 13/04/2016. c. To issue a writ order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS, directing/commanding to the opposite parties to restrain the private respondents, their agents, servants, or any person acting on their behalf, from creating any further third-party rights, alienating, transferring, or changing the nature or possession of the disputed land bearing Khata Number 1087, comprising Gata Numbers 217 and 313 (totalling 0.731 hectare), during the pendency of this writ petition." At the outset, a preliminary objection has been raised by learned Standing Counsel to the effect that the petitioner is assailing an order passed by the Consolidation Officer dated 19.02.2025 passed under Section 9-A(2) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 against which if aggrieved, the petitioner has an adequate and statutory remedy of filing an appeal. Sri Vaibhav Tripathi, holding brief of Sri Rahul Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner after making submissions could not dispute the fact regarding the availability of the statutory remedy of appeal. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rahul Mishra, Aditya Kumar, Rakshak Shukla, Vaibhav Tripathi Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Ram Prakash Maurya .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt., Lko. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) In this view of the matter, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present petition which is accordingly dismissed leaving it open for the petitioner to take recourse as may be available to him in law. It is also made clear that mere dismissal of the writ petition may not be taken as an expression of opinion on merits so that in case if the petitioner takes recourse to the alternate statutory remedy, the same shall be considered on its own merits. October 16, 2025 Asheesh WRIB No. 1012 of 2025 2 (Jaspreet Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHEESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench