FAYAZ AHMAD RATHER Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the instant application applicant -respondent no.6 seeks vacation of order dated 04.12.2013 passed in CMP No. 2880/2013 (OWP no. 1762/2013), on the grounds mentioned in the CMP.

(2.) NOTICE to Mr. Mir Suhail learned counsel for non -applicant -petitioner was issued on 9.12.2013 for objections/appearance. Learned counsel for non -applicant -petitioner appeared and submitted that he shall be allowed to advance arguments in opposition of application with reference to the pleadings in his writ petition. Prayer allowed.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner further submitted that despite directions from Civil Court respondent no.4 issued extension of period of Royalty Collector Contract 2012 -13 vide no. 1555/MCC/DGM/Ext/13/3484 -90 dated 28.11.2013 and another order No. 1556/MCC/DGM/EXT/13/3491 -97 dated 28.11.2013 in favour of respondent no.6 for further four months. Learned counsel for the petitioner -non -applicant submits that in case the order passed by this court on 04.12.2013 is not made absolute he shall suffer an irreparable loss.