WRIC/12555/2025 of HAUSILA PRASAD Vs ADDL. COMMISSIONER ADMINISTRATION, AYODHYA MANDAL, AYODHYA AND 2 OTHERS on 19 December 2025

1. The dispute in the present case pertains to succession of the property of one Lalta Prasad. It has been submitted that Lalta Prasad had two daughters, namely Ghumani and Phoolpati. As Phoolpati died issue- less while Ghumani had one son, namely Ram Poojan i.e. opposite party No.3. On the other hand, the petitioner claims his right and title of the property of Lalta Prasad on the basis of fact that he is son of Ram Bhajan, who was the brother of Lalta Prasad.

2. Ram Poojan had set up a case that Lalta Prasad had executed a will in his favour on 25.7.2016 on the basis of which he had moved an application for mutation before Naib Tehsildar, Tehsil Bikapur, District Ayodhya. The said application came to be allowed by means of order dated 27.7.2020. Against the order dated 27.7.2020 the petitioner had filed an application for recall on which by means of order dated 8.3.2022 the order dated 27.7.2020 was kept in abeyance and subsequently by means of order dated 25.10.2023 the order dated 27.7.2020 was recalled and there is no dispute with regard to the fact that the matter is still pending consideration before Naib

3. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Vinod Kumar Pandey, Rakshit Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Deepansi, Mangal Sen Yadav Hausila Prasad .....Petitioner(s) Addl. Commissioner Administration, Ayodhya Mandal, Ayodhya And 2 Others .....Respondent(s)

Tehsildar.

It has further been submitted that it is in aforesaid circumstances that an application for clubbing the cases was moved before Tehsildar on which he has further set aside the order dated 25.10.2023. The petitioner had preferred a revision before Additional Commissioner (Administration), who has rejected the revision on the ground hat the said order is interlocutory order against which no revision is maintainable.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, opposed the writ petition but does not dispute the aforesaid facts.

5. Learned counsel have jointly informed this Court that the matter is still pending consideration before Tehsildar and the dispute would be resolved after final order is passed by Naib Tehsildar.

6. The only grievance of the petitioner is that during pendency of the aforesaid proceedings the respondents are proceeding to alienate the land and, therefore, prays that protection may be granted to him till such time the Tehsildar decides the matter finally.

7. In light of the above and with the consent of the parties, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to Tehsildar, Tehsil Bikapur, District Ayodhya to decide the case, expeditiously say within a period of two months from the date a certified copy of this order is placed before him in accordance with law.

8. The parties to this petition undertake to cooperate in the said proceedings.

9. It is provided that till final orders are passed by the Tehsildar, the parties shall maintain status quo as existing today over the land in dispute. It is made clear that the protection granted by this Court shall cease to exist on orders being passed by Tehsildar deciding the said matter.

10. WRIC No. 12555 of 2025

With aforesaid direction the petition stands disposed of.

11. December 19, 2025 RKM. WRIC No. 12555 of 2025

(Alok Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench