AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
R.R. Yadav J.
Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel and perused the averments made in the writ petition.
From the perusal of the averments made in the writ petition, it is apparent on the face of record that the petitioner has filed a revision on 2222000, a copy whereof is filed; Annexure1 to the writ petition. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is running from pillar to post to get the aforesaid revision decided at an early date but it is pending without fixing a date in the Court of the Respondent No. 1 due to which the petitioner is suffering irreparable injuries.
3, It is submitted by the learned Counsel for petitioner that the petitioner is a poor agriculturist and his main source of livelihood is agriculture. But in the present case due to inaction of the Respondent No. 1, he and his family is brought al the verge of starvation.
Looking into the totality of the facts and circumstances of the present case, brought to my notice I and of the view that the present writ petition deserves to be allowed by issuing a direction to Respondent No. 1 to decide the revision of petitioner expeditiously, preferably within six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
Consequently, the instant writ petition is hereby allowed with a direction to Respondent No. 1 to decide the revision of the petitioner field on 2222000 expeditiously, preferably within six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Petition allowed