AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Both the writ petitions along with the connected applications are being taken up together treating the same as on day’s list.
This is an application for recalling of the order dated 5th February, 2018 wherein the learned Single Judge had clarified as follows : -
“Though the matter is appearing under the heading ‘specially fixed matters’, but none represents the petitioners, while the respondent no.4
and the Union of India are represented.
Since the interim order, as was enjoyed by the writ petitioners, already has expired on January 31, 2018, pendency of the writ petition may not be any
bar to take legal steps by the respondents, if any such step is required only in due course of law.â€
The ad-interim orders obtained by the writ petitioners dated November 11, 2016 has been extended from time to time by this Court. The respondent
no.4 has also filed applications for vacating the interim order passed on November 11, 2016 bearing number CAN 12036 & 12037 of 2016 in relation
to the above two writ petitions. However, the same have not been heard till date. The petitioner no.2 along with one Mr. Arun Kumar Mishra
submits that they have obtained no objection from their advocate Mr. S. N. Pandey to appear in Court today. No objection Vakalatnamas are kept
with the record.
The petitioner submits that when the order was passed on February 5, 2018 advocate appearing on their behalf was hospitalized and accordingly could
not be present himself in court.
The respondent no.4 prayed that he should be allowed to file affidavit-in-opposition before this court opposing the recalling applications. It is his
submission that since there are disputed questions of fact and some contrary submissions have been made by the petitioners, it would be appropriate to
allow the respondent no.4 to file affidavits.
The said affidavit-in-oppositions should be filed within a period of one week, that is, by April 2, 2018, replies, if any, be filed by April 5, 2018.
The petitioner, however, prays for extension of interim order that had expired on January 31, 2018. After hearing the submission of both parties
appearing in person, I am of the opinion that there is no need to pass an order extending the interim order passed on November 11, 2016 (having been
extended from time to time) today. However, I direct the respondent authorities not to take any coercive steps against the writ petitioners till April 15,
2018 or until further orders, whichever is earlier.
The Department is directed to send above two writ petitions along with related CAN applications to this Court by April 4, 2018 positively.
Let the matter be fixed under the heading
‘Specially fixed matter’ at the top on April 5, 2018.