RATNESWAR BARUAH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the instant writ petition, while issuing notice of motion on 27.04.2016, an interim order was passed. Subsequently, respondent No.2 filed an application for vacation/ alteration/modification of the aforesaid interim order, which was registered as I.A. (Civil) No. 188/2016. An objection to the said application was also filed by the writ petitioners.

(2.) On 04.08.2016, when the I.A. and the writ petition were listed, learned counsel for the parties had submitted that instead of taking up the interlocutory application, the writ petition may be taken up for disposal.

(3.) In the writ petition, respondent No.2 had filed affidavit but no reply affidavit was filed by the writ petitioners till then. Mr. Chamaria had submitted that the objection filed by the writ petitioners to the interlocutory application may be taken into consideration while disposing of the writ petition. To that Mr. Saikia had no objection.