ORDER

K.P. Singh, J. - By means of this writ petition the petitioners have prayed for a writ of prohibition prohibiting the Deputy Director of Consolidation from hearing the revision petition on merits. They have also prayed for a direction to abate the revision petitions Nos. 111 to 115 pending before the Deputy Director of Consolidation Ghazipur.

2. Brief facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that the revision petitions arising out of proceedings for title to the disputed plots are pending before the revisional Court. It appears that a Notification under S. 4 of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was issued regarding the village wherein the disputed land is situate, objections regarding title to the disputed land were filed. They were dealt with by the consolidation authorities and thereafter by this Court in writ petition and special appeals. In pursuance of the orders passed by this Court contained in Annexures C-1 to C-3 in the present writ petition revision petitions between the parties are pending before the Deputy Director of Consolidation Ghazipur, during the pendency of the aforesaid revision petitions a Notification under S. 4A of the Act has been issued in respect of the village wherein the disputed land is situate. The petitioners contend that the revision petitions will abate under the provisions of S. 4A(2) of the Act and the Deputy Director of Consolidation Ghazipur has no jurisdiction to proceed with the hearing of the revision petitions pending before him. In view of the aforesaid, the petitioners have filed the present writ petition and have prayed for the reliefs mentioned above.

3. The learned counsel for the contesting opposite parties has submitted in reply that the revision petitions are pending before the revisional Court in pursuance of the orders passed by this Court, hence in view of the provisions of S.52 of the Act, the revision petitions would be decided on merits and the Notification issued under S. 4A of the Act would be inapplicable to the disputed land. He has invited my attention to the provision of S. 52 of the Act which reads as below :

"As soon as may be after fresh maps and records have been prepared (under sub-s. (1) of S. 27) the State Government shall issue a notification in the official 'Gazette' that the consolidation operations have been closed in the unit and the village or villages forming part of the unit shall then cease to be under consolidation operations :

Provided that the issue of the notification under this section shall not affect the powers of the State Government to fix, distribute and recover the cost of operations under this Act.

(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-s. (1), any order passed by a court of competent jurisdiction in cases of writs filed under the provisions of the Constitution of India, or in cases or proceedings pending under sub-s. (1), shall be given effect to by such authorities as may be prescribed and the consolidation operations shall, for that purpose, be deemed to have not been closed."

4. Relying on the aforesaid provision it has been contended on behalf of the contesting opposite parties that since the proceedings were pending when Notification under S. 52 of the Act regarding the village had been issued, hence the revision petitions pending before the Deputy Director of Consolidation-Ghazipur would be decided on merits and the Notification issued under S. 4A of the Act would be inapplicable because the consolidation operation would not be deemed to have been closed regarding the disputed land.

5. Second submission raised on behalf of the contesting opposite parties is that the application moved by the petitioners has not been dealt with by the revisional Court hence the present writ petition is premature and not maintainable.

6. In rejoinder the learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that if necessary direction is not issued, the revisional Court shall decide the rev