Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:65909 Court No. - 50 Case :- CIVIL MISC REVIEW APPLICATION No. - 90 of 2025 Applicant :- Pahal Singh And 2 Others Opposite Party :- Telu Ram Counsel for Applicant :- Anshu Chaudhary,Sunil Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- Santosh Kumar Srivastava Hon'ble Chandra Kumar Rai,J. 1.Heard Mr. Anshu Chaudhary, learned counsel for the applicants (respondent Nos.72, 25 & 29) and Mr. Santosh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the writ petitioners. 2. The instant review application has been filed against the order dated 24.02.2025 by which the writ petition No.692 of 2025 finally disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2/ Board of Revenue, U.P. at Prayagraj to consolidate and decide the aforementioned revision Nos. 17, 18, 19, 20 and 21 in accordance with law expeditiously and preferably within a period of two months. The order of this Court dated 24.02.2025 runs as under:- "1. Heard Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Pankaj Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for State-respondents. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed for the following relief:- "Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent no.2 to consolidate the revisions as revision No. 17 of 2011-12 "Paloo and others Vs. Gaon Sabha and others", Revision No. 18 of 2011-12 "Laxman and others Vs. Jagdish and others", Revision No. 19 of 2011-12 "Laxman and others Vs. Pooran Singh and others" Revision No. 20 of 2011-12 "Karamveer and others Vs. Jagdish and others" and revision No. 21 of 2011-12 "Karamveer and others Vs. Ajmer and others" and decide the above noted revisions within stipulated period of time granted by this Hon'ble Court." 3. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that aforementioned five revisions filed by contesting respondents arising out of proceeding under Section 198 (4) of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act is pending before respondent no.2, Board of Revenue U.P. at Prayagraj since 2011-12. He further placed the grounds of revision of all the five revisions as well as the order sheet of the pending proceeding in order to demonstrate that matter is not proceeding expeditiously. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue, the present petition stands disposed of finally with a direction to respondent No.2, Board of Revenue, U.P. at Prayagraj to consolidate and decide the aforementioned revision Nos. 17, 18, 19, 20 and 21 in accordance with law expeditiously and preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned and without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties" 3. Mr. Anshu Chaudhary, learned counsel for the applicants submitted that this Court in Writ B No.47263 of 2016 stayed the further proceeding of revision No. 18/2011-12 vide order dated 29.09.2016 and aforementioned writ petition is still pending before this Court, hence the order dated 24.02.2025 should be recalled. The interim order dated 29.09.2016 passed by this Court in Writ B No.47263 of 2016 runs as under:- "Notice on behalf of respondents - 1 and 2 has been accepted by Chief Standing Counsel and on behalf of respondent -17 has been accepted by Sri Rajesh Yadav. Issue notice to respondents - 3 to 16/1. Counsel for the petitioner submits that Pooran Singh filed an application for cancellation of patta of the petitioners on the ground that he had been in possession over the land in dispute and it was not vacant land. Thus the status of Pooran Singh is not a simple complainant but he had also claimed his right over the land allotted to the petitioners. Thus his right to sue survives to his heirs but the substitution application has been illegally rejected by Board of Revenue. The matter requires consideration. Till the next date of listing, further proceeding in Revision No. 18/2011-12 (Laxman and others Vs. Jagdish and others) pending before Board of Revenue, shall remain stayed." 4.Considering the fact that interim order is operating in Writ B No.47263 in respect to revision No.18/2011-12, the order dated 24.02.2025 passed by this Court for deciding the revision should be modified to the extent that Board of Revenue U.P. Prayagraj should consolidate and decide the revision No.17, 19, 20 and 21 except revision No.18 in which interim order of this Court is operating. 5. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the instant review application is accordingly, disposed of with direction to respondent No.2/ Board of Revenue to decide the revision No.17, 19, 20 and 21 in the light of the earlier order of this Court within a period a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order before him. The earlier order of this Court dated 24.02.2025 is accordingly modified. Order Date :- 28.4.2025 PS* Digitally signed by :- PRITI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad