Anjani Kumar Mishra, J. - (1.) THIS writ petition arises out of proceedings under section 34 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act. The dispute relates to plot Nos. 423, 431, 463, 481, 482, 485, 614 -K, 639,640, 644 Ka, 670 -kha, 920 situated in Village Vishambharpur, Pargana Surhurpur, Tahsil Jalalpur district Ambedkar. It is the case of the petitioners that their father Jhinnu was recorded over the land in dispute. The petitioners claim on the basis of a registered Will in their favour. All three sons of Jhinnu were recorded on the basis of PA -11 contrary to the Will set up by the petitioner wherein as per their case, the opposite party No. 6 was not entitled to any share. An order was passed on 29.8.1988 in favour of the petitioners by the Assistant Tehsildar, the PA -11 entry was expunged and objection of opposite party No. 6 was rejected.
(2.) AGAINST this order dated 29.8.1988 an appeal was filed by the respondent No. 6 wherein the order impugned was set aside and the matter was remanded. In pursuance of the order of remand the Tahsildar passed an order on 15.4.2002 maintaining the earlier entry in favour of the three brothers. This order was affirmed in appeal against which a writ petition was preferred before this Court. This writ petition was ultimately dismissed relegating the petitioners to the alternative remedy of revision. This revision is said to be pending disposal before the Commissioner. It is the further case of the petitioner that during the pendency of the writ petition before this Court an order of status quo was operating and this order of status quo continued to operate during the pendency of the revision before the Commissioner. In violation of this, order of status quo, the respondent No. 6, Ram Dular, is alleged to have executed a sale -deed in favour of the opposite party Nos. 3 to 5 who applied for mutation on the basis of the said sale -deed giving rise to Case No. 1490. In this mutation, case No. 1490 an application for stay of the proceedings was filed by the petitioner which was rejected by the order dated 18.12.2013. Against the order dated 18.12.2013 the petitioner preferred revision No. 1015 before the Additional Commissioner (Administration), Faizabad which has been dismissed by the impugned. Hence this writ petition.
(3.) I have heard Sri B.R. Singh learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for the respondent No. 3 and have perused the record.;