- (1.) Heard Sri Ravi Kant, learned senior counsel for the applicants in the first and third recall applications, Sri P.N. Saxena, learned senior counsel in the second recall application and Sri M.A. Qadeer, learned senior counsel for the petitioner/ opposite party in all these three recall applications seeking recall of my judgment and order dated 1.10.2007 allowing the writ petition.
(2.) All the learned counsel have advanced the arguments on the recall applications as well as on the merit of the writ petition. Counter and rejoinder affidavits to the writ petition have also been filed by the applicants in the recall applications.
(3.) The first and second recall/ rehearing applications are liable to be dismissed on the ground that the applicants were fully aware of the pendency of the writ petition in question as they had mentioned about it and had also quoted/filed copies of some interim orders passed in two writ petitions pending before Lucknow Bench of this High Court i.e. writ petition No. 5383(M/B) of 2000 and writ petition No. 3488 (M/B) of 2002. The later writ petition was filed by respondent No. 17/4. However, judgment and order dated 01.10.2007 is set aside on the ground that it was passed without substitution of legal representatives of respondent No. 16 who are applicants in third recall application. Learned counsel in all the three recall applications have been heard on the merit of the writ petition.;