IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.19965 of 2011 Date of Decision.21.10.2011 Lekh Ram s/o Nar Singh s/o Sedhu Ram caste Ahir, r/o village Nang Tihari, Tehsil Narnaul, District Mahindergarh (Haryana) .....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana through Financial Commissioner (Revenue) Haryana at Chandigarh, Haryana Civil Secretariat, Chandigarh and others .....Respondents Present: Mr. Sandeep Kumar Yadav, Advocate for the petitioner. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? No -.- K. KANNAN J.(ORAL) 1. Notice of motion. 2. At the asking of Court, Ms. Kirti Singh, DAG, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner will supply three copies of writ petition to the State Counsel for proper communication of the order. 3. The revision, which is said to have been filed before the 1st respondent is not decided in spite of the matter being retained for nearly 3 years. The grievance is that the revision filed before the 1st respondent has not been disposed of. The 1st respondent will take appropriate decision on the case pending before him as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law and preferably within a period of 8 weeks and the same may be communicated to the petitioner. 4. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE October 21, 2011 Pankaj*