PROTIK PRAKASH BANERJEE,J. - (1.) Leave is granted to the learned advocate of the applicant/respondent No. 3 in the writ application to correct the cause title here and now by adding the name and style of the third respondent as an applicant.
(2.) The judgment dated July 27, 2018 had three parts. The first part recorded my prima facie satisfaction that the writ petitioners' names were not included in the application for financial assistance or in the District Level Inspection Team report. This means that contemporaneous records would have shown that they were not present during the time of inspection.
(3.) However, the second part recorded the sorry state of affairs for which despite several chances not only was affidavit in opposition not filed by the respondents within the stipulated time but also no co-operation was extended to the learned senior advocate of the State who is also an additional Government Pleader by the concerned authorities nor were records sent to him for being produced before this Court.;