- (1.) THIS writ application was presented on October 5 1988 when this court passed an order to the following effect : "considering the urgency of the matter as pleaded in the writ application, requirement under Rule 21 of the Writ Rules is dispensed with. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the grievances of the petitioner, as effectively placed by Mr. Dutta, I am prima facie satisfied that an interim order of injunction is merited for grant of an interim order in terms of prayer (g)of the petition till Friday, October, 7, 1988. The petitioner shall mot be allowed to join his duties in the meantime. Let this application appear for hearing on Listed motion on October 7,1988. Copies of this application are to be served upon all the respondents and an affidavit in service is to be filed in the meantime. "
(2.) THIS Court while granting interim order of injunction directed that the copies of the writ application be served upon all the respondents and an affidavit of service be filed in the meantime. Accordingly, copies of the writ application together with all annexures ware duly served upon all the Respondents and affidavit of service was affirmed on October 7, 1988 and the matter was. placed in the List of December 14, 1988 when Mr. Swapan Dutta was present on behalf of the petitioner, but no one was present for the -respondents. In those circumstances, this court passed an order, inter alia, to the following effect: "14. 12. 88. Mr. Swapan Dutta. . . . . . for the petitioner. The petitioner has filed an A/s. Let it be kept with the record. The interim order passed on 5th october 1988 is extended until further orders. Let the A/0 be filed within two weeks after the x- Mas holidays and let reply thereto be filed by two weeks thereafter and the matter will come up as a contested application four weeks after the x- mas holidays. "
(3.) THEREAFTER, on March 12, 1991, the matter was taken up for hearing when the order to the following effect was passed by this Court : "12. 3. 91. Mr. Swapan Kumar Dutta. . . . . . for the petitioner. Despite service of the copy of the writ application upon the Respondents' and despite directions given for filing of affidavits, no one appears for the respondents nor any A/0 has been filed. However, i allowed Mr. Dutta, learned Advocate for the petitioner to proceed with his arguments. Hearing is concluded and judgment is reserved. ";