Ritu Raj Awasthi, J.;- Notice on behalf of the opposite party no. 1 has been accepted by Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate whereas notice on behalf of the opposite party nos. 2 to 4 has been accepted by the learned Chief Standing Counsel. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Suit No. 89/1985 (Fida Mohammad Vs. State of U.P.) is pending unnecessarily since a considerable long time and it is ripe for hearing. A direction be issued to decide the suit at an early date. 4. The suit was filed for recovery which was decreed for an amount of Rs. 15,434/- with interest. Against the said order, the opposite parties preferred an application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC for recalling of the order dated 16.12.1986. The said application was rejected. Thereafter, they preferred a revision before the District Judge which was also rejected by order dated 26.10.2002. Thereafter the opposite parties preferred an appeal which was allowed vide order dated 27.4.2005 and the matter was remanded, now the matter is to be considered by the Trial Court again. 5. I have considered the submissions made by the parties' counsel. The suit is pending since 1985, it requires to be decided at an early date. 6. In this view of the matter, with the consent of parties' counsel and without entering into the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of finally with the direction that the Trial Court shall consider and decide the pending suit No. 89/1985 (Fida Mohammad Vs. State of U.P.), expeditiously, as early as possible. 7. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of.