- (1.) CLMA No. 4623 of 2008 : On 10th October, 2007, four weeks' time was given to the respond ents to file the counter affidavit. There after, about half a dozen adjournments were obtained by the respondents for fil ing the counter affidavit and yet the coun ter affidavit was not filed. On 9th July, 2008, the Court passed a specific order closing the right of the respondents to file the counter affidavit because the counter affidavit had not been filed till that date.
(2.) THROUGH the medium of this Ap plication, the following prayer has been made : "it is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant permission to the applicant / respondent no. 2 to file counter affidavit condoning the delay caused in filing the coun ter affidavit in the present writ peti tion and further be pleased to take the counter affidavit on record, and / or pass such other / further order (s), which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. " The application is supported by the affidavit of Assistant Regional Trans port Officer, Dehradun. First and foremost, the Appli cation is not, itself, maintainable be cause, in the Application, there is no prayer for review or recall of the or der dated 9th July, 2008. The re spondents should have known that unless that order is reviewed or re called, no permission can be granted for filing of the counter affidavit.
(3.) SECONDLY, neither in the Appli cation nor in the supporting affidavit, has one word been written as to why did the respondents not file the coun ter affidavit in the past 9 months. There is no explanation whatsoever as to why could the respondents not file the counter affidavit in last 9 months. The Application is wholly mis conceived and totally non-maintain able and, accordingly, is rejected with costs assessed at Rs. 15. 000/- to be deposited in the High Court Legal Aid Fund within two weeks from today. Writ Petition No. 1964 of 2007 (M/s) :;