Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:87717 Court No. - 35 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 16714 of 2025 Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar Respondent :- Commissioner Aligarh Division Aligarh And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Akhilesh Kumar Singh,Suresh Chandra Varma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Krishna Kant Singh Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:- "A. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 18.2.2025 passed by commissioner Aligarh Division Aligarh, case no.RST/280/2025, (Computer case no.C202518000000280), Manoj Kumar versus .... under section 333 of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act, 1950, contained in Annexure no.1." 3. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that after a sale deed was executed in favour of the petitioner by the respondent 3rd set, a proceedings under Section 166/167 of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act were initiated by the respondent 2nd set in the year 2012. Later on, good since prevailed and respondent 2nd set filed an application along with an affidavit for withdrawal of the proceedings. However, even after withdrawal application was filed, the concerned S.D.M proceeded with the matter and called for a report and, thereafter held that the sale deed executed in favour of the petitioner to be void and directed the land be recorded in the name of State. Against this order, the petitioner preferred a revision and revision of the petitioner has been allowed by the order dated 31.7.2024 holding the sale deed of the petitioner to be valid and the order passed by the S.D.M was set aside. After this order, again the respondent 2nd set moved an application for recalling the revisional order before the revisional court which has been entertained and notices have been issued to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that once the proceedings were withdrawn by the respondent 2nd set, he cannot be permitted to move an application for recalling the order passed by the revisional court in which they are not party. 4. Learned Standing Counsel has submitted that no useful purpose would be served in keeping this petition pending and the petitioner may be permitted to filed his objections as to the maintainability of the restoration proceedings. 5. The writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file objections within two weeks. In case, such objections are filed by the petitioner, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law within two weeks, thereafter after hearing all the parties concerned on the question of maintainability of the restoration application in view of the fact that the earlier proceedings were withdrawn by the respondent 2nd set. Order Date :- 23.5.2025 S. Singh (Manish Kumar Nigam, J.) Digitally signed by :- SAVITA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad