IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 1993 of 2008 (M/S) With Interim Relief Application No. 7554 of 2008 Lalit Prasad, S/o Sri Yamuna Prasad, R/o Bholanath Garden, Haldwani, District Nainital. ……Petitioner Versus Om Prakash S/o Sri Indra Lal and eight others. ….Respondents. Sri Pradeep Hariya, learned counsel for the petitioner. Date :- November 14, 2008 Hon’ble B. S. Verma, J. Heard Sri Pradeep Hariya, learned counsel for the petitioner. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order passed by the Assistant Collector, Commissioner passed in Revision whereby the status quo order passed by the Assistant Collector on 21.11.2006 was vacated. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that the respondent may not alienate the land to third parties during the pendency of suit. The argument of the learned counsel cannot be accepted for the reason the tenure holder can transfer his land up to the extent of his share. A suit for partition under Section 176 of U.P.Z.A & L.R. Act was filed by the petitioner against the respondent. It is well settled no injunction can be granted against the co- owner so far as the share concerned that is to be decided by the Assistant Collector and later on land be partitioned by lots. The learned Assistant Collector has rightly vacated the status quo order on the ground that both the petitioner as well as the respondent are co-owner and in joint possession of the land and the land is to be partitioned through court in partition suit. I find no perversity and illegality in the order passed by the Assistant Collector/ Commissioner in revision. The Writ petition is devoid of merit. The writ petition is dismissed in limine. All pending applications stand disposed of accordingly. (B.S. Verma, J.) Dated : 14.11.2008 RMY