- (1.) THE appeal is summarily taken up and disposed of.
(2.) IT is from an order passed by an Hon'ble Single Judge dated 1 -7 -2005, whereby his Lordship refused to interfere with orders passed for seizing the financial and administrative powers of the Pradhan. In the judgment under appeal his Lordship has recorded that the writ petitioner argued that the order had been passed without application of mind and was perverse and erroneous. His Lordship has further recorded that the learned Counsel for the writ petitioner was not able to demonstrate how the impugned order was perverse or erroneous.
(3.) JUST before concluding the judgment, his Lordship has said as follows: “No other point was argued on behalf of the learned Counsel for the writ petitioner”.;