Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:12784 Court No. - 8 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 1142 of 2025 Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar Respondent :- Commissioner, Lko Division, Lko And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Km.Rachna Mishra,Anil Kumar Verma,Mohammad Sohail Khan,Satish Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Notice on behalf of the respondents No.1 to 3 has been accepted by the office of the Chief Standing Counsel. Shri Dilip Kumar Pandey, learned counsel has accepted notice on behalf of the respondent No.4. In view of the order proposed to be passed by this Court, notice to the private-respondents No.5 to 11 is dispensed with. The sole grievance of the petitioner is that in a suit initiated under Section 116 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, a final decree was prepared. The petitioner, feeling aggrieved, preferred an appeal which is engaging the attention of the respondent No.1 since August, 2024. It is further urged that along with the appeal, the petitioner had also preferred an application for interim relief. The respondent No.1 while admitting the appeal, issued notices to the respondents in the appeal, however, the application for interim relief has not been considered despite the petitioner having been moved an early hearing application before the respondent No.1. It is urged that in the aforesaid circumstances, some expedite order be passed so that the application for interim relief, moved by the petitioner, can be considered and decided at an early date. Considering the sole grievance of the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that no gainful purpose will be served in keeping the aforesaid petition pending rather ends of justice can be served by directing the respondent No.1 to consider and decide the application for interim relief, preferred by the petitioner along with the appeal which is engaging the attention of the respondent No.1, after affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties, but without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties preferably on the next date. In case, if the same is not possible, then within three weeks thereafter. It is made clear that the Court has not examined the case of either of the parties on merits and the Court concerned shall consider and decide the interim relief application of the petitioner strictly in accordance with law. With the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 4.3.2025 Rakesh/- Digitally signed by :- RAKESH PRAJAPAT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench