JUDGMENT Abhinava Upadhya, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondents. 2. The petitioner had filed a suit for declaration under Section 229-B of UPZA&LR Act being Suit No. 3 of 2001(Subhangi Vs. Anjani Kumar and others). It is alleged that respondents no.2 to 5 filed a written statement accepting the plaint allegation and upon the basis of written statement the said suit was decreed in favour of the petitioner on 13.2.2004. The allegation is that the respondents moved restoration application and filing a vakalatnama on behalf of the petitioner by presenting impostor got the order recalled by order dated 6.6.2011. 3. It is submitted that the petitioner had no knowledge of such an order but when she came to know of the same, she filed an application for recalling the order dated 6.6.2011 which application was filed on 7.12.2012. It is alleged that the said application is still pending and no orders have been passed. 4. The writ petition is disposed of with the observation that in case the petitioner has moved such an application, the same may be dealt with in accordance with law without allowing unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties provided there is no other legal impediment in the same, inasmuch as, no interim order is operating against the disposal of the said case.