( 1 ) THIS mandamus appeal is at the instance of a writ petitioner and is directed against the order dated 21st July, 2006 passed by a learned Single Judge by which His Lordship refused to extend the interim order earlier granted while entertaining the writ application.

( 2 ) AFTER filing of the appeal, the appellant before us filed an application for mandatory-injunction directing the respondent No. 6 to restore and reinstall all the hoardings of the appellant-petitioner which were allegedly dismantled by the said respondent during the pendency of the writ application and alternatively, to allow the appellant to reinstall those hoardings and to grant an order of stay of the notice impugned in the writ application.

( 3 ) WE have heard out the application for mandatory-injunction along with appeal itself.

( 4 ) THE facts giving rise to filing of the present appeal may be summarized thus:

" (a) The writ petitioner claiming to be an advertising company has preferred the said writ application thereby challenging a notice dated 13th June, 2006 issued by the respondent Nos. 6 and 6b by which the writ petitioner was directed to dismantle the hoarding put up by