D.S. Sinha, I.M. Quddusi, JJ. - (1.) Shri Yasharth, holding brief of Shri Ajit Kumar, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Shri Satish Chaturvedi, learned Counsel appearing for the contesting respondents No. 1 and 2, point out that the case was listed before the Division Bench of the Court on 12th October, 1999, 27th October, 1999, 1st November, 1999, 17th November, 1999, 6th December, 1999 and on 14th December, 1999, under the heading "For Hearing" on the basis of the Office Report dated 11th October, 1999, founded on the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 13th September, 1999.
(2.) Learned Counsels further point out that the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 13th September, 1999 was misunderstood by the office in as much as the Hon'ble Supreme Court did not require the Court to dispose of the writ petition finally. According to learned Counsels, what was required by the Hon'ble Supreme Court was disposal of the Misc. Application for stay filed alongwith the writ petition.
(3.) Learned Counsels for the parties also submit that under Chapter V of the Rules of Court, 1952 Misc. application for stay in an admitted petition is cognizable by an Honble Judge sitting alone, and instant petition is, indisputably, admitted petition.;