Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:50201 Court No. - 50 Case :- WRIT - B No. - 22043 of 2014 Petitioner :- Lachhiman Respondent :- D.D.C. And 3 Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Namwar Singh,Sanjiv Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Manvendra Nath Singh,Rajeev Kumar Saxena,V.K. Singh,V.K. Yadav Hon'ble Chandra Kumar Rai,J. 1. Heard counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents and Mr. Amit Verma, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Manvendra Nath Singh, learned counsel for the contesting respondents. 2. The instant petition has been filed for the following reliefs:- "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling for the records of the case and quashing the order dated 24.3.2014 passed by District Director of Consolidation, Varanasi respondent no.1. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.1, District Direction of Consolidation, Varanasi to transfer the case revision No. 1693/ 501 Dhanik Raj and others Vs. Jaggu and others under Section 48 (1) of the U.P.C.H. Act pending before the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Varanasi from the present Deputy Director of Consolidation Varanasi to any other Court of coordinate jurisdiction in District Varanasi." 3. Under the impugned order dated 24.3.2014, transfer application filed by petitioner to transfer the proceeding of revision No. 1693/501 under Section 48 (1) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 hereinafter referred as U.P.C.H. Act was dismissed by District Deputy Director of Consolidation Varanasi vide order dated 24.3.2014. 4. This Court entertained the matter and granted interim order staying the proceeding of revision vide order dated 17.4.2014. 5. In pursuance of the order dated 17.4.2014, parties have exchanged their pleadings. 6. Mr. Amit Verma, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Manvendra Nath Singh, learned counsel for the contesting respondents submitted that instant petition has become infructuous as Officer concern against whom allegation was made has already been transferred long back. He further submitted that proceeding of revision filed by private respondents has been stayed by this Court, as such, the instant petition be dismissed as infructuous and direction be issued to decide the pending revision within stipulated period. 7. I have considered the averment made in the writ petition and heard the learned counsel for private respondents as well as learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents. 8. There is no dispute about the fact that title revision filed by private respondents is pending before Deputy Director of Consolidation Varanasi. There is also no dispute about the fact that transfer application filed by petitioner was rejected by District Deputy Director of Consolidation vide order dated 24.3.2014. 9. Considering the fact that more than 11 years have passed from the date of filing of transfer application and the averment has been made in the affidavit filed on behalf of private respondents that concerned Deputy Director of Consolidation has already been transferred, no further cause of action survives in the matter. 10. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is dismissed and respondent no.5, Deputy Director of Consolidation, Varanasi is directed to decide the revision No. 1693/ 501 Dhanik Raj and others Vs. Jaggu and others under Section 48 (1) of the U.P.C.H. Act expeditiously preferably within period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order after affording proper opportunity of hearing to both the parties. Order Date :- 7.4.2025 Vandana Y. Digitally signed by :- VANDANA YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad