Court No. - 35 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 9891 of 2025 Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pushpendra Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pradeep Singh Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2. This writ petition has been filed for the following relief:- " A. Issue, a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order impugned dated 16.08.2024 passed by the Assistant Collector/ Tehsildar, Gyanpur, District- Bhadohi/respondent no.3, in Case No.02796 of 2019 Computerized Case No.T201916670402796 (Gaon Sabha Vs. Mata Prasad) (Annexure No.2 to this Writ Petition). B. Issue, a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the Respondent Nos.2 & 3 (Collector, District-Bhadohi) and (Assistant Collector Ist Class/Tehsildar (Judicial), Tehsil-Gyanpur, District- Bhadohi), not to demolish the house in question of the petitioner i.e. part of area 0.052 Hect., from Arazi No.234 area-0.129 Hect., situated at Village- Sansarapur, Tehsil-Gyanpur, District-Bhadohi, and also not to take any coercive measure without following due course of law. C. Issue, a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the Respondent No.2/Collector, District-Chitrakoot, to decide the Appeal No. D2025 166 70000323 of 2025 (Rakesh Kumar Vs. State of U.P.), within some stipulated period as fixed by this Hon'ble Court (Annexure No.3 to this Writ Petition)." 3. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that against the order passed under Section 67, the appeal filed by the petitioner is pending consideration and the respondent-authority are trying to demolish the house of the petitioner even without waiting of the disposal of the appeal. Since the order passed under Section 67(2) is subject to the final orders passed under Section 67(5) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, there is no justification for executing the order once the appeal is pending. 4. Learned Standing Counsel submitted that no useful purpose would be served in keeping this petition pending and a direction be issued the respondent no.2 to decide the appeal itself within a time framed manner. 5. The present petition stands disposed of finally with a direction to the respondent No. 2 to consider and decide the appeal, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of four months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order after ensuring service upon all the respondents and after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned provided that there is no other legal impediment. 6. Till disposal of the appeal, parties are directed to maintain status quo. 7. It is made clear that in case, undue adjournments are taken by the petitioner in the pending appeal, the interim protection granted by this Court shall automatically be vacated. Order Date :- 7.4.2025 S. Singh (Manish Kumar Nigam, J.) Digitally signed by :- SAVITA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad