WP(C) 5606/2005 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA Heard Mr. S.C. Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioners as we ll as Mr. N.N. Upadhyay, learned counsel for the respondents No. 7 and 8. I have also heard Ms. R. Chakraborty, learned State Counsel for the official responden ts. From the materials on record, it appears that pursuant to the FI R lodged by the petitioners on 18.5.2005 with the Officer in-charge, Barghat Pol ice Station Out Post, the police registered a case. The P.S. Case culminated int o GR Case No. 835/2005 and is now pending in the Court of learned C.J.M., Tezpur . The FIR was lodged against eth respondents No. 7 and 8 alleging conspiracy and cheating on their part in respect of mortgaging the Tractor in qu estion and their alleged endeavor to misappropriate the amount, they received by mortgaging the Tractor. The learned C.J.M., Tezpur, by his order dated 27.6.200 5 gave the zimma of the vehicle (Tractor) to the respondents No. 7 and 8 upon ex ecution bond of Rs. 4 lakhs. The aforesaid order of the learned C.J.M. was put to challenge b y the petitioners before the learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Tezp ur by way of Criminal Revision No. 32 (S-3)/2005. The Criminal revision petition was entertained by order dated 12.7.2005 and pending disposal of the same, it w as provided that the seized Tractor should be given to the financer of the said vehicle by executing bond of Rs. 4 lakhs. Thus, neither the proceeding before th e learned C.J.M. nor the proceeding before the learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Tezpur has attained its finality. In the meantime, the petitioner made Annexure-4 representation d ated 19.7.2005 to the Deputy Commissioner, Sonitpur seeking his interference to the matter. According to the petitioners, they are entitled to get zimma of the vehicle (Tractor). On the other hand, upon a reference to Annexure-A and B docum ents annexed to the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondents No. 7 and 8 , it is their stand that since the amount mentioned in the said two documents wa s taken from them, they are entitled to get zimma of the vehicle (Tractor). As to what would be outcome of the proceeding before the learned C.J.M. and the Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Tezpur and the matter rel ating to the zimma of the vehicle (Tractor) is for the learned Courts below to d ecide and the Deputy Commissioner cannot interfere with the matter on the basis of the representation filed by the petitioners. Thus, the prayer made in this wr it petition for a direction to the Deputy Commissioner to dispose of the Annexur e-4 representation dated 19.7.2005 cannot be granted. Mr. Upadhayay, learned counsel for the respondents No. 7 and 8 h as produced the copy of the order dated 20.2.2006 passed by the learned Adhoc Ad ditional Sessions Judge (FTC), Tezpur in the aforesaid Criminal Revision petitio n. By the said order, referring to the instant proceeding, the said Court has pa ssed an order keeping in abeyance the proceeding until further order. Such a cou rse of action has been adopted in view of the pendency of the instant writ petit ion, in which there is reference of orders passed by the Courts below. In view of the above, I am not inclined to issue any direction t o the Deputy Commissioner, Sonitpur to dispose of the Annexure-4 representation 19.7.2005. Instead, it is hereby provided that the learned Courts below shall pr oceed with the matter as expeditiously as possible strictly in accordance with l aw. At this stage, Mr. Upadhayay, learned counsel representing the r espondents No. 7 and 8 submits that in case of any delay relating the zimma of t he vehicle (Tractor), same will get damaged. The learned Courts may bear in mind that aspect of the matter towards early disposal of the proceeding. Registry shall send copy of this order to the Courts below and a lso send back the records of the case, if has been received. Writ petition is disposed of.