JUDGMENT : ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. The petitioner was selected as the most suitable candidate for being granted license for which he had applied but only because of a complaint lodged by one Poonam Devi, who has been impleaded in the present writ petition as respondent no. 7, an inquiry appears to have been initiated which has yet not been concluded. 3. Mr. Sanjay Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to Annexure-3 which is a notice to four of the complainants including respondent no. 7 and such persons who have been selected as licensee for a final determination of the disputes raised by such complainants. 4. We refrain ourselves from commenting on the manner in which notices have been sent by the SDO, Muzaffarpur (West) but we, under the circumstances, keeping in mind that it is the mandate of the Control Order, 2016 that all vacancies should be filled expeditiously, direct that all such complaints referred to in Annexure-3, be finally disposed of and if it is found that such complaints are not noteworthy or worth taking action upon, take the selection process to its logical conclusion. 5. The entire exercise ought to be completed within a period of ninety days, failing which this Court shall take serious view of the matter. 6. With the aforesaid directions/observations the writ petition stands disposed of.