- (1.) Special leave granted.
(2.) When a notice was ordered to be issued in this case a specific direction was given that the notice must recite that the matter will be finally heard on that day. Such a notice has been served on the respondents. Yet respondents have not entered appearance. We, therefore, see no justification for serving a fresh notice and proceed to dispose of the matter finally.
(3.) One Dwarika Nath Tewari, who is now dead, had obtained rule nisi in Civil Rule No. 217 of 1976 in the High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Manipur and Tripura. When rule nisi came up for hearing on April 21, 1983 which appears to be the first day of hearing after the rule was issued, the learned Judges of the Division Bench of the High Court made an order which reads as under :- "None to press this application. Accordingly the same is rejected. The rule is discharged. That stay order granted by this Court on 6-5-1976 stands vacated." It appears that soon thereafter within a span of about 10 days an application was moved on behalf of the petitioner pointing out to the Court the circumstance in which neither the petitioner nor his three learned counsel were present and sought the indulgence of the Court to recall the order dated April 21, 1983 on the ground that April 21, 1983 happened to be a day on which the Court reopened after Bihu holidays and that the learned Senior Counsel who had gone to Calcutta during the vacation had not been able to return on account of the 'irregularity of air services. It was further, stated that the two other learned counsel were busy in Courts Nos. 2 and 3 when the matter was called for hearing and a request was made to pass over the matter. This ground did not find favour with the learned judges of the High Court and the application for re-calling the order was rejected. Hence this appeal by special leave.;