S.P.Mehrotra, J. - (1.) CASE called out in the revised-list. None has appeared for the petitioner. Sri Vijai Shanker, learned counsel for the respondent No. 4 is present.
(2.) THE present writ petition has been filed, inter alia, praying for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No. 2 to decide the Auction/Objection No. 15 of 2003, Mohan Kumari v. Kailash Nath and others, as early as possible within three months. It appears that the land of the petitioner, being guarantor of the loan taken by the respondent No. 5, was auctioned. The petitioner filed objections under Rule 285-I of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Rules before the respondent No. 2. The said objections were numbered by Auction/Objection No. 15 of 2003. By the order dated 24.12.2003, the respondent No. 2 granted interim stay order. However, on 20.11.2004, on prayer made by the objectionist/revisionist-petitioner for adjournment of the case, the respondent No. 2 allowed the adjournment, but vacated the interim stay order. Thereupon, the present writ petition has been filed seeking the reliefs, as mentioned above.
(3.) BY the interim order dated 27.4.2005, this Court, inter alia, directed as follows : "...................Considering the aforesaid facts, as an interim measure, the dispossession of the petitioner from the land in dispute shall remain stayed until further orders of this Court, provided he has not already been dispossessed. The respondent No. 2, Commissioner, Varanasi, Region, Varanasi is further directed to decide the Objection No. 15/03 within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order before him without allowing any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties." Counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent No. 4. In paragraph No. 9 of the said counter-affidavit, it is stated that objections filed by the petitioner before the respondent No. 2 were decided by the respondent No. 2 by the order dated 5.7.2007. Copy of the said order dated 5.7.2007 has been as Annexure C.A. 5 to the counter-affidavit. It is thus evident that pursuant to the observations made in the aforesaid interim order dated 27.4.2005, passed by this Court, the objections filed by the petitioner have already been decided by the respondent No. 2.;