JUDGMENT K.P. Singh, J. - Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. By means of this writ petition the petitioner seeks a mandamus directing the consolidation authorities not to dispossess the petitioner from the plot in dispute i.e., plot no. 126/0.90 acre during the pendency of the revision in the court of respondent no. 1 and to decide the revision within certain short time ; failing which the petitioner shall suffer irreparable loss and injury which cannot be compensated in the terms of money. 2. The learned counsel contends that if the stay order is not granted to the petitioner, the petitioner's boundary will be demolished. 3. Since the petitioner has approached this court against refusal of the prayer for stay, I do not think that the ends of justice would be met by entertaining the writ petition and granting stay order to the petitioner. However, in my opinion, the ends of justice would he sufficiently met if the opposite party no. 1 is directed to decide the revision petition within two months from the date when the copy of this order is produced before him. It is also expected of the revisional court to see that status quo on the spot should be maintained by the parties concerned and the petitioner's wall should not be demolished and that the petitioner may not be dispossessed from the disputed land till his revision petition is decided by the opposite party no. 1. 4. With the above observation, this writ petition is finally disposed of at the admission stage, but it is expected that the revisional court would see that the status quo regarding the disputed land should be maintained by all the parties concerned. The petitioner may not be put to loss in any manner because of the refusal of the stay order by the revisional court. 5. A copy of this order may be given to the petitioner on receipt of usual charges within 24 hours.