- (1.) -HEARD Sri M. K. Gupta, learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
(2.) DESPITE time having been granted to the respondents vide order dated 11. 4. 2008 neither the respondents have filed any counter-affidavit nor the learned Standing Counsel was able to inform as to whether the respondents have passed final order in the matter as permitted by this Court vide order dated 11. 4. 2008.
(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioners contended that in view of Clause 11 of the U. P. Kerosene Control Order, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the "1962 Order") the order of suspension cannot be continued beyond a period of two weeks. In the present case since the order of suspension was passed on 17. 3. 2008 and more than one and half month has already elapsed, therefore, he contended that by operation of law the impugned order of suspension has ceased and, therefore, the respondents pursuant thereto cannot be interfere with the functioning of the petitioner as a kerosene dealer treating as if the licence of petitioners is continuing as suspended. He also made a statement at the Bar that despite of this Court's order dated 11. 4. 2008 which was communicated to the respondents, no final order has been passed by them till date.;