Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:18064 Court No. - 9 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 667 of 2025 Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar Prajapati Respondent :- Anita And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ramesh Kumar Chaurasia Hon'ble Ms. Nand Prabha Shukla,J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking direction to the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) East, Ballia to decide the Case No. 174 of 2023 (Rakesh Kumar Prajapati Vs. Aneeta and others), as early as possible within stipulated period as fix by this Hon'ble Court and further direct the defendants not to create third party interest in the property in question during the pendency of the Suit before the learned court below. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner-plaintiff had filed the injunction suit on 31.01.2023 which is pending decision till date. However, it is worth to mention that no such direction can be issued in view of the judgment of this Court passed in the case of Ali Shad Usmani vs. Ali Isteba; 2015 (2) ADJ 250 (DB). The Division Bench of this Court in case of Ali Shad Usmani (supra) has held that no direction can be issued to the sub-ordinate courts for deciding the suit within stipulated period. Relevant portion of the judgment is extracted hereunder:- "We are not inclined to issue a direction for the expeditious hearing of a Civil Suit which is pending before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), District- Azamgarh. It would be most inappropriate to Court to entertain a writ petition under Article 226 and/or under Article 227 of the Constitution simply for the purpose of expediting the hearing of a suit. Such orders, if granted, place a class of litigants, who move the court in a separate and preferential category whereas other cases which may be of similar or greater antiquity and urgency are left to be decided in the normal channel. Hence, any such direction may be issued with the greatest care and circumspection by the High Court otherwise the Civil Courts will be overburdened only with requests for expeditious disposal of suits, which have been expedited by the High Court. Most of the litigants cannot afford the expense of moving the High court and would not, therefore, be in a position to have the benefit of such an order. Ultimately, it must be left to the judicious exercise of discretion of the concerned Court to determine whether a ground for urgency has been made out. We emphasize that there may be other cases such as involving senior citizens, those who are differently abled or people suffering from a particular disability socio-economic or otherwise which may prime cause of urgent disposal. It is for the learned Trial Judge in each case to apply his or her mind and decide whether the hearing of the suit to be expedited. For these reasons, we are not inclined to entertain the petition. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to cost." Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the court concerned to conclude and decide the Civil Suit No. 174 of 2023 (Rakesh Kumar Prajapati Vs. Aneeta and others), strictly in accordance with law after giving full opportunity of hearing to both the parties and subject to the cooperation of the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, from the date of production of certified copy of this order, in case, there is no other legal impediment. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of. It is hereby clarified that this Court has not applied its mind to the claim of the petitioner on merits nor has made any observation in this regard. Order Date :- 7.2.2025 Nisha Digitally signed by :- nisha kumari High Court of Judicature at Allahabad