Petition Dismissed as Premature; Await Appellate Authority's Decision Before Seeking Court Intervention.

The HC dismissed the writ petition as premature, noting that the Appellate Authority had not yet rendered a decision on the appeal. The court found no grounds to intervene, as the petitioners' concerns were speculative and based on an anticipated disallowance of their appeal. The previous order permitting the appeal remained unchallenged. The court directed the parties to obtain certified copies of the order, and no costs were awarded.

---

---

Issues: Apprehension of Appellate Authority disallowing appeal; Prematurity of writ petition pending Appellate Authority's decision; Speculation on submissions and observations made during appeal hearing.

In this judgment, the petitioners expressed apprehension that the Appellate Authority might disallow their appeal based on a writing dated December 11, 2017, by the Advocate for the petitioners. The State, represented by the Additional Advocate General, argued that the decision of the Appellate Authority, awaited since the hearing on December 7, 2017, renders the writ petition premature. The State highlighted that a previous order dated September 4, 2017, allowed the petitioners to prefer an appeal, which has not been challenged. Therefore, it was deemed premature to speculate on the outcome of the appeal before the Appellate Authority's decision is communicated. The judge found no merit to interfere in the present writ petition due to the pending decision of the Appellate Authority. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed without any order as to costs. The parties were directed to obtain urgent website certified copies of the order upon fulfilling the necessary formalities.

---