IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL
A.GUNESHWAR SHARMA, J.
M/s Avisy Services Pvt Ltd - Appellant
Versus
M/s Nimbus Systems (P) Ltd - Respondent
MC (WP(C)) No.810 of 2024 in WP(C) No.846 of 2024
Decided on : 18-02-2025
ORDER :
A.GUNESHWAR SHARMA, J.
[1] This application MC[WP(C)] No. 810 of 2024 is filed by the applicant/respondent No. 3 for vacation of the interim stay orders dated 11.12.2024 and 13.12.2024 passed by this Court in WP(C) No.846 of 2024 filed by the respondent No.1/writ petitioner. It is stated that the interim orders have been passed ex-parte, without hearing the applicant and private respondent based on incomplete facts and narration and non-maintainability of the writ petition. The application has been filed in terms of liberty granted by this Court vide order dated 18.12.2024. As permitted by this Court, the applicant and writ petitioner also filed short written submissions.
[2] Brief fact leading to filing of the instant misc application is that the petitioner in WP(C) No.846 of 2024, while moving the Court for the first time on 11.12.2024, the matter was ordered to be listed on 13.12.2024 in the motion column as the learned Government Advocate was without file. It was directed to maintain status quo as on date till the next date. On 13.12.2024, this Court was pleased to order that the authorities should not finalise the bidding evaluation process and the work order shall not be issued till the next date. On 18.12.2024, this Court issued notice in the writ petition and learned GA accepted notice on behalf of State respondent and MSPDCL and Mr. Sharvan Kumar, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant/respondent No.3 and directed to take step for notice to respondent No.4 by way of speed post. The interim order was extended till next date giving liberty to the private respondents for vacation of the earlier interim order. The matter was directed to be listed on 20.01.2025. The application for vacation of the interim orders has three components- (i) being ex-parte without hearing the private parties, (ii) incomplete and suppression of facts by the writ petitioner, and (iii) non-maintainability of the writ petition.
[3] Mr. Sarvan Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant/respondent No.3 has submitted that the MC (WP(C)) No.810 of 2024 was filed and moved on 19.12.2024 and the Hon’ble Court issued Notice fixing on 20.1.2025. It is stated that as the application has not been disposed of within a period of two weeks, the ad-interim order dated 11.12.2024 and 13.12.2024 should be vacated automatically in terms of the stipulation under
Gheesa Lal v. State of Rajasthan
Interim orders extended in the presence of parties cannot be vacated automatically under Article 226(3) without a hearing on merit.
(1) An interim order lawfully passed by a Court after hearing all contesting parties is not rendered illegal only due to long passage of time – If a High Court concludes after hearing all concerned p....
Ex parte ad-interim relief under Article 226(3) vacates automatically after two weeks if not adjudicated, irrespective of parties' actions, ensuring prompt resolutions.
The mandatory nature of Article 226(3) of the Constitution of India and the need to prevent abuse of interim orders.
A party must act promptly under Article 226(3) to vacate an interim order; inaction may imply acceptance.
Article 226(3) of the Constitution of India is mandatory, leading to the automatic vacation of interim orders if not disposed of within two weeks.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.