ANISH GEORGE Vs. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The grievance of the petitioners is that in order to get over Ext.P2 interim order passed by the Civil Court, the 5th respondent made an application to the respondents for the issue of an explosive licence. Petitioners state that objecting to the grant of licence, though they have filed representations, without considering this complaint, the licence is likely to be granted. It is with this grievance, the writ petition is filed.

(2.) Standing counsel appearing for respondents 1 to 3 submits that though application has been received, orders have not been passed.

(3.) If as stated, orders have not still been passed by the 2nd respondent, before whom petitioners claim to have filed Ext.P5, there is no reason why the objections raised by the petitioners in Ext.P5 also shall be considered. In that view of the matter, I direct the petitioners to produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition before the 2nd respondent, who shall consider Ext.P5 representation filed by the petitioners also as and when orders on the application made by the 5th respondent is passed. Writ petition is disposed of as above.