Pratap Kr. Ray, J. - (1.) Heard the learned Advocates appearing for the parties. In the instant application, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs : "(b)writ and/or writ in the nature of mandamus do issue commanding respondent No. 2 to act in accordance with law and to forthwith constitute a screening committee. (c) A writ and/or writ in the nature of prohibition thereby restraining the respondents from giving effect to the superannuation of your petitioner from 2.11.1992 till disposal of this writ application. (f) Injunction be issued thereby restraining the respondents from giving any effect to the superannuation of the petitioner which is to take effect on and from 2nd November, 1992 till the disposal of this application and further directing the respondents to constitute a screening committee without any further delay". The matter was moved ex parte without any notice and to move the matter ex parte the prayer was made to this effect : "(a) The Rule 27A of the Rules relating to the application under Article 226 of the Constitution be dispensed with".
(2.) U.C. Banerjee, J. (as His Lordship then was) by the order dated 24th September, 1992 on entertaining the application ex parte passed the following order : "Status quo as of date will continue as regards the teacher's position in the College until further orders of this Court. Affidavit-in-opposition is to be filed within a period of three weeks after long vacation and reply thereto, if any, within one week thereafter and the matter will come up for hearing five weeks after vacation."
(3.) This application has been opposed by the Director of Public Instruction by filing affidavit. The College Authority, however, did not file any affidavit-in-opposition. But as per direction of this Court dated 1st July, 2004/- an affidavit has been filed answering the issue whether the petitioner had worked in the College till September, 1999 or not. The records also have been produced. The fact of the writ application to this effect.;