In the course of the hearing of the writ petition, Mr. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel for the petitioner, argued that the two affidavits, namely, one bearing tender No. 8389/4 to oppose the writ petition and the other bearing No. 8387/2 which is a counter to the rejoinder filed by the peti-tioner, filed on 25-5-91 on behalf of respon-dents 1, 2 and 5 are to be rejected for lack of proper verification. The writ petition was heard at some length. On 11-6-91, the day to which the hearing of the writ petition was adjourned, Shri G. C. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the respondents 1, 2 and 5, prayed that he may be allowed to file an application for leave to re-verify the two affidavits. The prayer was allowed. Accordingly, a petition was filed alongwith two proposed supplemen-tary affidavits with an alternative prayer to allow them to file fresh affidavits.

2. Paragraph 26 of the affidavit bearing tender No. 8389/4 runs :

"26. That the statements made in this counter-affidavit in paras - 1 and 2 - are true to my knowledge, those made in paras 3, 6 and 7 to 25 are true to my belief and those made in paras 4 and 5 are matters of records which, I firmly believe to be true.".

Para