- (1.) On 3.7.2015 when this petition and the connected petition was taken up on the request of counsel for the petitioners, the matter was adjourned for today with the specific understanding that both these petitions as well as three revisions arising from the some suit which has given rise to this petition would be decided finally on the next date provided nomination is obtained from the Hon'ble The Chief Justice in the said three revisions also for getting them decided by the same Court. In pursuance of the above, the Hon'ble The Chief Justice has been pleased to direct that all the connected cases be placed before this Court. In furtherance thereof this writ petition alongwith connected writ petition and aforesaid three revisions have been placed in the additional list today. Sri Ajai Shankar Pathak, learned counsel for the petitioners today seeks an adjournment on the pretext that the petitioners have withdrawn instructions from the earlier Senior Counsel and they want to engage another Senior Advocate and that no Senior Advocate is available on account of the elections of the Bar Association.
(2.) The above request is nothing but an abuse of the process only in order to get the matter adjourned. If the petitioners chooses to withdraw instructions from the counsel at the last moment, they do it at their risk. Accordingly, request for adjournment of this petition on the above grounds is not acceptable.
(3.) At this stage counsel for the petitioners moved an application seeking adjournment on the ground that the petitioners want to challenge the nomination made by the Hon'ble The Chief Justice before the Supreme Court.;