RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN,J. - (1.) This court has passed order dated 21.02.2019 as under:- "Heard Sri Anuj Kudesia, learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri Rakesh Chandra Tewari, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party No.3, the same is taken on record. By means of order dated 11.02.2019, this Court passed the following order:- "Notice on behalf of opposite parties no. 1, 2 and 4 have been accepted by the learned Chief Standing Counsel. Issue dasti notice to the opposite party no.3. Issuance of notice to the opposite party no.5 shall be considered later on. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the tender of the respondent no. 5 was rejected and he was blacklisted, therefore, he had threatened to the petitioner of abducting his children and harm his family residing at Ghaziabad. Therefore, in repercussion the petitioner has threatened to him, but the same was not on duty hours. An explanation was called from the petitioner by means of letter dated 21.1.2019, the reply of which was submitted by means of letter dated 23.1.2019, but without considering the same, the suspension order dated 1.2.2019 has been passed. He further submitted that the employees association has also made a complaint in regard to the conduct of the respondent no. 5. Learned Standing Counsel prays for and is allowed a week's time to seek instructions. List on 19.2.2019 as fresh."
(2.) Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents has submitted that vide letter dated 12.02.2019 all the opposite parties have been apprised the order dated 11.02.2019 and asked to provide the relevant instructions in the matter.
(3.) Today, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has submitted that no instructions have been received from any of the opposite parties.;