Court permits affidavits, sets deadlines. Stay on audit notices extended. Key issues highlighted for June hearing.

The Court allowed respondents to file affidavits, directing submission within specified timelines. Reference to coordinate Bench judgments of Calcutta and Jharkhand High Courts aided in legal interpretation. Stay on audit notices by various High Courts was granted until a specified date or further orders, based on legal principles. The case is scheduled for a hearing in June 2020, emphasizing the ongoing legal proceedings and the significance of the issues discussed. The judgment demonstrates a thorough analysis of legal precedents to reach a reasoned decision.

---

---

Issues:
1. Whether respondents should be allowed to file affidavits in the matter.
2. Interpretation of a coordinate Bench judgment of the Calcutta High Court.
3. Reference to a coordinate Bench judgment by the Division Bench of the Jharkhand High Court.
4. Stay of similar notices of audit by different High Courts.

Analysis:

1. The judgment begins with the Court allowing the respondents to file affidavits in the matter after a thorough hearing. The Court directs the filing of an affidavit-in-opposition within six weeks and a reply two weeks thereafter.

2. The counsel for the respondent authorities relies on a coordinate Bench judgment of the Calcutta High Court in a specific case where the Court had refused to pass any interim order. This reference is crucial in understanding the legal context of the case.

3. The judgment highlights the reference made by the Division Bench of the Jharkhand High Court to the Calcutta High Court's order and the differing opinion expressed by Aniruddha Bose, CJ. The specific paragraphs 9 and 10 of the order are quoted to elucidate the interpretation and application of the law in similar situations.

4. The Court considers submissions from all parties and various orders from different High Courts regarding the stay of similar audit notices. After reviewing the cases, the Court forms a prima facie view that the impugned notices should be stayed until a specified date or until further orders, based on the precedents and legal principles discussed in the judgment.

5. In conclusion, the Court schedules the matter for the month of June 2020 under the heading 'Hearing,' indicating the ongoing nature of the legal proceedings and the importance of the issues at hand. The judgment reflects a detailed analysis of legal precedents and interpretations to arrive at a reasoned decision regarding the matters in contention.

---