Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:84295 Court No. - 35 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 14413 of 2025 Petitioner :- Vishnu Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajesh Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed for the following relief: "(a) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the imlpugned judgment & orders dated 23.01.2025 passed by Additional Commissioner, Chitrakoot Dham Mandal Banda (Respondent No.2) in revision No.00314 of 2021 Computerized Case No.C202107000000314 (Vishnu Kumar vs. Matsya Jivi Sahkari Samiti & others) u/s 210 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 and Order dated 17.05.2019 passed by (respondent no.4) in Vigyapti Patrank no.852/R.I. Office Banda under Section 61 Rule 57 of U.P. Revenue Code 2006/Rules. II. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directed to the respondent no.3 and 4 to demolish the illegal construction, constructed the police chauki by the police persons and house of the villagers over the bheeta land and handed over to the petitioner of the disputed land." 3. The petitioner has challenged an order by which, the respondents had submitted the file before the S.D.M. for execution of an agreement for grant of fishery lease to respondent no.7. The petitioner has preferred a revision against that order, which has been dismissed. 4. Learned Standing Counsel has submitted that against the order, by which it was directed that agreement be executed with lessee revision was not maintainable and has rightly been dismissed by the revisional court. It has been further submitted by the learned Standing Counsel that the remedy open to the petitioner was to move an appeal under Rule 59 of the UP Revenue Rules, 2016 for cancellation of lease granted to the respondent no.7. Instead of doing the same, he has challenged the order, which is referred above. 5. Learned counsel submitted that under a wrong legal advice, a revision was filed by the petitioner and he may be granted liberty to file an appeal against the grant of fishery lease to the respondent in accordance with Rule 59 of the UP Revenue Code, 2006. 6. Learned Standing Counsel has raised a objection to this. 7. Petitioner is at liberty to take appropriate proceedings for challenging the grant of fishery lease to the respondent no.7. 8. Needless to say, the observations made in the revisional order, it is impugned in the writ petition will not come in way of the petitioner while considering his application challenging the fishery lease of the respondent. 9. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 20.5.2025 Priya (Manish Kumar Nigam, J.) Digitally signed by :- PRIYA KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad