Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:60316 Court No. - 50 Case :- WRIT - B No. - 1415 of 2025 Petitioner :- Santosh Kumar Agnihotri Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Akshay Prakash Srivastava,Dharmendra Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Chandra Kumar Rai,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to implead the Consolidation Officer, Kanpur Nagar as respondent no. 5. 3. Heard Sri Dharmendra Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Siyaram, Verma, learned counsel for the respondent no.4 and Sri Tarun Gaur, learned Standing Counsel for the State. 4. Brief facts of the case are that title objection under Section 9A(2) of the U.P.C.H. Act filed at the instance of the petitioner against the basic year entry is pending before respondent no. 5-Consolidation Officer. The instant petition has been filed for the following reliefs:- "1. A writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 03.04.2025 passed by the Settlement Officer Consolidation Kanpur Nagar by which the permission granted in favour to the petitioner to harvest the standing crops vide order dated 02.04.2025 is cancelled. 2. A writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents not to prevent/stop the petitioner to harvest the standing crops of mustard (LAHHI) of gata no. 641(M), 687, 702, 741(A), 684(A), 688 and 701 area 1.5370 hectare situated at village Viroh Tehsil Bilhaur, District Kanpur Nagar. 3. Any other writ order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case. 4. Award cost of this writ petition to the petitioner." 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner's title objection is pending before respondent no. 5-Consolidation Officer since January 2025. He placed the copy of the objection filed under Section 9A(2) of the U.P.C.H. Act and a copy of the question-answer issued by the Office of Consolidation Officer, Kanpur Nagar as well as order sheet of the pending proceeding in order to demonstrate that the title dispute is pending before respondent no. 5-Consolidation Officer. He submitted that petitioner is in possession of the plot in question and the petitioner has sown crops in the plot in question, as such authorities be directed to permit the petitioner to harvest the crops standing in the plot in question as well as cultivate the plot in question in peaceful manner. 6. Sri Siyaram Verma, learned counsel appearing for private respondent no.4 submitted that petitioner is not in possession of the plot in question, as such the prayer made in the instant petition cannot be allowed. He further submitted that Civil Suit filed by the petitioner has been dismissed and Second appeal is pending before this Court, as such the prayer made in the instant petition for harvesting the standing crops cannot be allowed. He further submitted that petitioner is not recorded tenure holder of the plot in question, as such the prayer made in the instant petition cannot be allowed, as such the instant writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 7. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 8. There is no dispute about the facts that title objection filed by the petitioner against the basic year entry is pending before respondent no. 5-Consolidation Officer. 9. Since, the title objection filed by the petitioner is pending before the Consolidation Officer, as such the petitioner should press his title objection in accordance with law as well as the petitioner can file necessary application before the Court where the dispute is pending rather then writ petition before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with respect to harvesting of standing crops as well as cultivation of the plot in question. 10. No interference is required in the matter. 11. The writ petition is finally disposed of and respondent no. 5-Consolidation Officer is directed to decide the pending title objection under Section 9A(2) of U.P.C.H. Act, after framing issues and giving opportunity to the parties to lead evidence in accordance with law, expeditiously. Order Date :- 22.4.2025 Neetu Digitally signed by :- NEETU SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad