S.U. Khan, J. - (1.) This writ petition is directed against order dated 18.10.2004 through which revision of contesting respondent has been admitted and a date after more than five months i.e. 25.3.2005 has been fixed and meanwhile operation of the order impugned in the said revision (Revision No. 40 of 2003-04) has been stayed by Sri S.P. Pandey, learned member, Board of Revenue, Allahabad. Through the said order records of Trial Court have also been summoned The revision is directed against a temporary injunction order passed by S.D.O. under section 229-D of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act in favour of petitioner/plaintiff in a regular suit under section 229-B of the Act. Normally in the revisions directed against injunction orders records of Court below should not be summoned. The Court completely fails to understand that after granting blanket stay order why such .1 long date was fixed.
(2.) It is directed that the aforesaid revision must be heard by some other member and it shall be decided within a month from the date of production of certified copy of this order after serving notice of the date upon learned Counsel for the revisionist appearing before Board of Revenue. The aforesaid member is expected to be more careful in future. Until decision of the revision before Board of Revenue both the parties must maintain status-quo in respect of possession over the land in dispute Both the parties are also restrained from transferring the land in dispute or creating any charge thereupon or changing the nature thereof. Writ petition allowed accordingly.
(3.) This writ petition is being allowed without issuing notice to respondent No. 3, the only contesting respondent. In case he feels aggrieved by this order he is at liberty to apply of its recall.;