- (1.) In the writ petition, the petitioner, who is a cable multi-system operator, has challenged notices dated 22nd May, 26th May and 2nd June, 2006 issued by the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and has prayed for reconnection of the service in terms of the agreement dated 1st July, 2005 entered into by the petitioner and the SET Discovery Private Limited, the respondent No. 2.
(2.) The matter was moved on 8th June, 2006. After hearing the learned Advocates for the parties, directions for affidavits were issued. By an interim order the respondent No. 2 was directed to restore the connection preferably within twenty-four hours and was restrained from disconnecting the same before the disposal of the writ application or expiry of the period of the agreement between the parties which ever is/was earlier.
(3.) Perusing the order dated 8th June, 2006, I find that Mr. Banerjee appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 raised the point of maintainability and it. was recorded that the "submission with regard to maintainability by Mr. Banerjee is not correct. This is, however, my prima facie view and the matter shall be gone into in great deal after the affidavits are exchanged.";