JUDGMENT Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner had applied for renewal of licence issued to him to carry on the business of fertilizer, however, the appropriate authority of the Agriculture Department has not paid any heed to the said prayer relating to renewal of the licence of the petitioner. The term of the licence of the petitioner expired on 02.12.2015 and as submitted by the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, in terms of the provisions contained in clause 11 of the Fertilizer Control Order, 1985, the petitioner ought to have applied in the given format to be accompanied by the renewal fee and requisite certificate. However, no such document has been brought on record of this petition by the petitioner. Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has thus, submitted that there appears to be no application for renewal of the licence in terms of the aforesaid provisions contained in the Control Order, 1985, which can be said to be pending before the licencing authority. He has also stated that the reminder letter dated 04.11.2016, which has been annexed as annexure no.3 to the writ petition, appears to have sent through post, postal receipt whereof has also been affixed on annexure no.3, however, no proof is available on record to establish that the letter dated 30.11.2015 contained in annexure no.2 to the writ petition was ever served upon the licensing authority. Be that as it may, let appropriate decision be taken by the licencing authority on the application dated 04.11.2016 said to have been made by the petitioner to the District Agriculture Officer, Amethi, which has been annexed as annexure no.3 to the writ petition expeditiously, say within a period of six weeks from the date certified copy of this order is furnished to him. We may make it clear that we have not made any observation as to the merit of the claim of the petitioner and it will be open to the District Agriculture Officer while taking decision on the application dated 04.11.2016 to bear in mind the submissions, which have been advanced by the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel before the Court. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition is finally disposed of.