HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 34267 of 2025 Court No. - 53 HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J. 1. Heard Ms. Pratiksha Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents and Shri Azad Rai, learned counsel for the respondent no.3 Gaon Sabha. 2. The present petition has been filed with the prayer to decide the Suit No.17134 of 2025 filed by the petitioner for partition under Section 116 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. A further prayer has also been made to restrain the private respondent nos.4 to 10 from interfering over his land i.e. Arazi No.23 during pendency of the aforesaid suit. 3. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that he has filed a suit for partition of his holdings under Section 116 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. A stay application has also been filed in the suit. The respondent no.2 by the order dated 16.08.2025 has directed the parties not to change the nature of property in question and fixed 02.09.2025 as the date for disposal of the stay application. However, on 02.09.2025 general date adjourning the matter was fixed for 10.12.2025. It is further stated that long date for hearing on the stay application has been fixed by the respondent no.2 even though all the parties were present. 4. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, respondent no.2 is directed to make all endeavours to decide the stay application filed in the aforementioned suit on the next date, without granting any further adjournment. It is further observed that as all the parties have appeared in the aforementioned suit the authority concerned shall make all endeavours Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Girja Shanker Mishra, Pratiksha Rai Counsel for Respondent(s) : Azad Rai, C.S.C. Samar Singh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 9 Others .....Respondent(s) to decide the suit itself at the earliest. 5. With the aforesaid directions/observations, this writ petition stands disposed of. 6. After passing of the above order, learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance upon an order of this Court dated 19.05.2023, passed in Writ-C No.17072 of 2023. Para 16 of the aforesaid order is relied upon and is reproduced hereinafter:- "16. If any stay application, recall application or any other miscellaneous application is filed during above mentioned proceedings, then same should be decided within a period of one month and if same is not decided within aforesaid time, then reason should be recorded. It is made clear that during the pendency of recall application or stay application, no coercive action be taken against the applicant. " 7. After filing of the suit for partition, the respondent no.2 has already passed an interim order dated 16.08.2025 directing the parties not to change the nature of property in question. The petitioner has again filed an application on 02.09.2025 for directing the parties to maintain status- quo, which is still pending and no order has been passed upon it. 8. In view of the above, it is always open for the petitioner to move an application for early hearing of the aforesaid suit in light of the observations of this Court in the order dated 19.05.2023. September 25, 2025 Ashok Kr. WRIC No. 34267 of 2025 2 (Arun Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad