1. The parties to the instant writ petition are represented by their respective learned advocates.

2. At the very outset, Mr. Dinda, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent/State submits before this Court that he intends to file a report supported by affidavit in connection with the instant writ petition.

3. On perusal of the orders dated 16.08.2023, 17.11.2023, 05.01.2024, 09.02.2024, 20.03.2024, 17.05.2024 and 10.06.2025, it appears to this Court that on all the occasions, the respondent/State and its instrumentalities were represented by their learned advocate, however, no prayer was made before this Court to file a report and/or affidavit-in-opposition.

4. Such being the position, this Court is of considered view that it would be unjust if any accommodation is given to the State to submit a report since the instant writ petition is pending for a period of two years or more.

5. Ms. Roy, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the NHAI/authority submits before this Court that apart from the report as filed by the respondent nos. 2, 3 and 4 and as affirmed on 13.12.2023, she intends to file some more documents. She also seeks for an accommodation.

6. Prayer for accommod