Roy. J.

1. The points for determination in both the appeals being the same, although the appellants are different, even though they are related, they are taken up for analogous hearing and consideration, by consent of parties.

2. Both the appeals were directed against the judgment and orders dated 19th May, 1987, passed in C.R. No. 7882 (W) of 1985 and C.R. No. 7883 (W) of 1987 respectively, by a learned Single Judge of this Court and by such judgment, the learned Single Judge was pleased to dismiss the Writ proceedings and discharge the Rules, with a further stipulation that such orders of discharge will not prevent the Writ petitioners of move appropriate Civil Court, for seeking redress and relief in accordance with law. It should be noted that at the time of hearing of the Rules and during the course of hearing, there were interim order issued and the learned Judge directed such interim order to continue for two months from the date of judgment. We feel that such extension of the interim order was granted to facilitate the Writ petitioners to move the appropriate forum and to obtain necessary orders, if so advised.

3. It was the case of the appellant in F.M.A. No. 855 of