Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:88346 Court No. - 35 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 16807 of 2025 Petitioner :- Munna Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mahendra Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sudhir Bharti 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 following relief:- "(i) issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 17-02-25 passed by Sub-Divisional Magistrate (District Level) Deoria, District Deoria in Computer Case No. T- 200652018 "Hadish Vs. Hanif." (ii) Issue a writ order of direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 11.04.25 passed by Additional Commissioner (Judicial) 3rd, Gorakhpur Region, Gorakhpur in Computer Case No.T-202505000000555 "Munna Vs. Nathoo and others. (iii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and direct to respondent authority to maintain the status quo with regard to possession during the pendency of Appeal Before Respondent No.2." 3. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that a suit under Section 144 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 has been decreed by the court below, against which the petitioner has filed an appeal, which has been admitted by lower appellate court, but the application for interim relief has been rejected. Since the proceedings under Section 144 of the U.P. Revenue Code 2006 are the proceedings for title and appeal against the decree has been entertained and admitted by the court below, in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in Mool Chand Yadav Vs. Raza Buland Sugar Company Limited reported in 1982 (3) SCC page No. 484 and in view of judgment in case of Maheshwar Pratap Shahi Vs. State of U.P. and 5 Others in Writ B No. 412 of 2020 dated 13.02.2020, it has been argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that the lower appellate court has erred in law in rejecting the stay application. 4. No useful purpose would be served in keeping this petition pending. 5. The appellate court i.e. respondent no. 2- Commissioner, Gorakhpur Region, Gorakhpur is directed to consider and decide the appeal in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably, within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned and without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties provided there is no other legal impediment. 6. For a period of six months, the parties are restrained from alienating the property in dispute. 7. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 23.5.2025 Priya Digitally signed by :- PRIYA KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad