The HC held that while the respondent-authorities were required...

The HC held that while the respondent-authorities were required to continue the proceedings on the earlier show-cause notices, they had misinterpreted the HC's order and issued fresh de novo impugned notices. Instead of quashing the impugned notices and reviving the earlier ones, the HC directed the petitioner to file a reply to the impugned show-cause notices issued by the respondent-authorities. The interim order restraining the respondents from issuing further advisories or summons to the petitioner's buyers in the context of the pending proceedings was continued. The petition was disposed of.

---