Anil Kumar, J.;— Heard Shri Ram Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned State Counsel and perused the record. As the controversy involved in the present case is trivial in nature, so with the consent of learned counsel for parties present today, the writ petition is finally heard and disposed of at the admission stage. Notice issued to opposite party no.2 is dispensed with. Facts in brief of the present case are that the controversy involved in the present case relates to land of Gata No.171, area 0.010 hect. situated at village Mahmadpur, Pargana Mijaura, Tehsil Bheeti, District-Ambedkar Nagar recorded in the name of Patiraji, Ghirrau, Ram Tej, Ram Ran, Dev Rang, Sat Sang, Dev Raj and Ram Narayan who were the original tenure holder. As per version of the petitioner, the said persons executed a sale deed dated 3.2.2006 in favour of the petitioner and two other persons namely Shri Rajendra Kumar Mishra and Shri Sher Bahadur Yadav. In view of the abovesaid facts, the petitioner moved an application under Section 34 of the Land Revenue Act for mutation of his name on the land in question in the revenue record on 13.2.2006, accordingly, a case has been registered as Case No.889 before the opposite party no.1 in which opposite party no.2 has filed an objection. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that since 2006 the matter is pending at the end of opposite party no.1 and not decided till date. In this regard, he relies on the document as contained in Annexure No.2 to the writ petition on the basis of which, he submits that a direction may be issued to the opposite party no.1 to decide the matter at an early date after hearing the parties. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the records. As per the admitted facts of the present case that a case bearing Mutation Case No.889 filed under Section 34/35 of the Land Revenue Act before the opposite party no.1 is still pending before the said authority since 2006 during the pendency of which several dates have been fixed as mentioned in Annexure No.2 of the writ petition. As per the admitted facts of the present case that a case bearing Mutation Case No.889 filed under Section 34/35 of the Land Revenue Act before the opposite party no.1 is still pending before the said authority since 2006 during the pendency of which several dates have been fixed as mentioned in Annexure No.2 of the writ petition. In such circumstances, where the matter has not been decided and kept pending by the authority concerned, this Court has issued a direction by judgment and order dated 16.10.2012 passed in Writ Petition No.5868 of 2012 "Nisar Ahmad vs. S.D.O. Musafirkhana Distt. Amethi & 2 Ors.", relevant portion quoted herein below:- "The petitioner has brought on record the order sheet of the case. Upon perusal of which I find that on all the dates the matter has been adjourned with general dates. Thus, it is established that till date no substantial proceeding has taken place. Such work of the Revenue Officers, who are clothed with the Judicial work, is not appreciated for the reason that ultimately the litigants are sufferers due to their business in the administrative work. This Court has taken cognizance at several times and has also apprised the State Government to constitute even separate cadre of the Revenue Officers to deal with the judicial work but the State Government has also not taken care of it. Though on the request of learned counsel for the petitioner, the direction is issued to officer concerned to dispose of the aforesaid case after providing opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned within six months after receipt of a certified copy of this order, yet the Registrar of the Court is directed to send a copy of this order along with the order sheet of the case( Annexure No. 2 of the writ petition) to the Chief Secretary of the State Government to look into the proceedings of the case happened at the level of the Revenue Officers and take necessary action to constitute separate cadre as has been observed herein above. The enormity of such litigation in which the litigants, who are in majority the small tenure holders, or down trodden people require serious necessary action to be taken by the State Government in the matter. I hope that the State Government shall spare some time to look into the matter seriously and definitely take necessary action accordingly. The enormity of such litigation in which the litigants, who are in majority the small tenure holders, or down trodden people require serious necessary action to be taken by the State Government in the matter. I hope that the State Government shall spare some time to look into the matter seriously and definitely take necessary action accordingly. Writ petition stands disposed of finally." Further, a circular has been issued by the Board of Revenue numbered as Circular No. 15863/4-5-86 dated August 7, 1990 by which it was directed that the matter arising out of mutation case should be decided within a period of 60 (Sixty) days. Accordingly, opposite party no.1 is directed to consider and decide the matter in question expeditiously preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order after hearing the counsel for the parties in accordance with law. It is clarified that this Court has not adjudicated the claim of the petitioner on merit. With the above observation, the writ petition is finally disposed of. _____________