Jurisdictional challenge and connected writs led to restoration of the writ petition, with no interim protection granted.

A writ petition raising a jurisdictional challenge was restored because a connected petition involving the same issue was already admitted and the jurisdictional question required coordinated consideration. The Court noted that the adjudication order had been taken in statutory appeal, that the appeal had been dismissed on limitation, and that a writ challenge to that dismissal was still pending. In these circumstances, it held that the present writ should also be heard with the connected matters. As the dispute had already moved through adjudication and appellate stages, no interim protection was granted in the appeal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition ought to be restored and heard along with the connected writ petitions in view of the jurisdictional challenge and the pendency of the statutory proceedings; and whether any interim protection was warranted in the appeal.

Analysis: The order under challenge had declined interference on the premise that the impugned order was appealable and that the writ petitioners should not bypass the appellate remedy. The Court noted that a connected writ petition raising the same jurisdictional issue had already been admitted and that the jurisdictional question required consideration. It further noted that the adjudication order had been carried in statutory appeal, the appeal had been dismissed on limitation, and a writ challenge to that dismissal remained pending. In these circumstances, the Court considered it appropriate that the present writ petition also be heard with the connected matters. As the matter had progressed to adjudication and appellate stages, no interim protection was granted in the appeal.

Conclusion: The appeal was allowed, the impugned order was set aside, and the writ petition was restored to the file of the Single Bench to be heard with the connected writ petitions; no interim relief was granted.

---