UTTAM KR SARKAR Vs. RATAN KR BARMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. K. H. Choudhury, learned Sr. Counsel assisted by Mr. A. Sarma, learned counsel appearing for the applicant/Respondent No. 3 in the writ petition. Also heard Mr. H. K. Barman, learned State counsel for the State respondents and Mr. BD Konwar, learned counsel for the opposite party/writ petitioner.

(2.) By this Misc. application, the applicant has sought for alteration/modification/cancelllation of the interim order dated 19.1.05 which was subsequently allowed to continue vide order dated 4.2.05 rendered in the connected writ petition i.e., WP(c) No. 464/05.

(3.) Only ground which has been pressed into service in this Misc. application for cancellation/ modification of the interim order, as mentioned above, is that since the orderunder challenge i.e., 12.1.05 has been passed by the Govt. by applying the doctrine of pleasure, this court ought not to have entertained the writ petition by invoking Article 226 of the Constitution and thereby ought to have refrained from passing the interim order.