HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 32432 of 2026 Court No. - 37 HON'BLE CHANDRA KUMAR RAI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Dinesh Kumar Tiwari, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed for the following relief:- "a. to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned mutation order dated 08.07.2026 passed by the learned Naib Tehsildar Tehsil Dhampur, District Bijnor in Mutation Case No. 5433 of 2024. b. to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondent authorities not to give effect to the impugned mutation order during the pendency of the statutory appeal before the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate. c. to issue a writ, order or direction restraining the private respondents, their agents, servants and any person claiming through them from: changing the nature of the disputed property; carrying out plotting or colonization, raising any construction; alienating or transferring the disputed property; and creating any third-party rights over the disputed land till the final disposal of the statutory appeal and/or the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Manoj Kumar Gautam Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Smt. Nargish Parveen .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 6 Others .....Respondent(s) present writ petition. d. to direct the respondent authorities to ensure maintenance of status quo regarding the nature and possession of the disputed property." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that mutation order dated 8.7.2026 has been passed in favour of private respondent no. 6 in illegal and arbitrary manner. He submitted that sale deed cannot be executed by respondent no.5 in favour of private respondent no.6 as such, the mutation court has no jurisdiction to pass mutation order. He submitted that in civil suit filed on behalf of petitioner an injunction order is operating even then private respondent no.6 is changing the nature of plot in question. He submitted that impugned mutation order dated 08.07.2026 passed by Naib Tehsildar should be set aside. He further submitted that mutation appeal filed on behalf of the petitioner is pending before Sub Divisional Officer. 4. Mr. Dinesh Kumar Tiwari, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents submitted that it is mentioned in para no.12 of the writ petition that mutation appeal is pending as such petitioner should participate in the pending proceeding of mutation appeal rather writ petition before this Court. He submitted that no particular of pending appeal has been annexed along with instant petition, as such no direction can be issued in respect to the pending mutation appeal. 5. I have considered the argument advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State- respondents and perused the record. 6. There is no dispute about the fact that mutation order has been passed by Naib Tehsildar on 08.07.2026 in favour of respondent no.6. 7. Perusal of records demonstrate that mutation appeal has been filed on behalf of the petitioner against the mutation order dated WRIC No. 32432 of 2026 2 8.7.2026 passed by Naib Tehisildar. The record further demonstrate that aforementioned suit no.1132 of 2007 filed at the instance of the petitioner is pending before the Civil Court. 8. Considering the aforementioned facts and circumstances of the case, there is no scope for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India as mutation appeal at the instance of petitioner is stated to be pending before Sub Divisional Officer. 9. No interference is required in this matter. 10. The writ petition is disposed of with observation that pending mutation appeal filed by petitioner shall be decided by the appellate court/ Sub Divisional Magistrate in accordance with law. September 11, 2026 PS* WRIC No. 32432 of 2026 3 (Chandra Kumar Rai,J.) Digitally signed by :- PRITI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad