Biswanath Somadder, J. - (1.) The writ petition was filed in the year 2002 and after the initial interim order was passed - which was extended from time to time - the petitioners appear to have lost interest in the matter sometime after May, 2005. This is evident from the series of adjournments that were taken on behalf of the petitioners on one pretext or the other subsequently. Sometimes, the writ petition was even adjourned because the advocate was not present. Ultimately, after a period of eight years, the writ petition was dismissed for default on 19th August, 2013. Subsequently, by an order dated 14th February, 2014, the writ petition was restored. In spite of the writ petition being restored, the petitioners neither demonstrated any due diligence or any sort of promptness or eagerness to prosecute the writ petition, which invariable resulted in the writ petition being again dismissed for default on 4th June, 2014. After the second dismissal, yet again, another restoration application was filed, which also was dismissed for default on 11th May, 2015.
(2.) Now it appears that a restoration application ' seeking restoration of the restoration application ' has been taken out on 20th July, 2016, wherein a prayer has also been made for condonation of delay of 405 days in filing of the said application.
(3.) A question that comes up for consideration is whether the Court will grant the applicant such reliefs as prayed for in the facts of the instant case.;