AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
7 paragraphs · 261 wordsAhanthem Bimol Singh, J
Heard Mr. D. Julius Riamei, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Mr. Shyam Sharma, learned GA appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 and Ms. Geetarani, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3.
When this matter is taken up today, learned GA made a prayer for granting three weeks’ further time for filing counter affidavit on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 & 2. This prayer has been objected by Mr. Julius Riamei, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners on the ground that ample opportunity has been already granted to the respondents for filing counter affidavit and accordingly made a prayer for disposing this matter on the basis of the materials available on record.
Objection raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners is noted. However, in view of the issue involved in the present writ petition, this Court is of the considered view that one last opportunity should be granted to the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 for filing counter affidavit.
Accordingly, three weeks’ further time is granted to the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 for filing counter affidavit, if so advised. It is made clear that if the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 failed to file counter affidavit on or before the next date, the present writ petition will be disposed of on the basis of the materials available on record.
List this case again on 8th August, 2022.
Registry is directed to furnish a copy of this order to the learned counsel for all the parties through their WhatsApp/e-mail for doing the needful.