SHILLONG: The division bench of Judges comprising Justices HS Thangkhiew and W Diengdoh said the interim orders will be effective till April 30.
The division bench was constituted with a view to ensuring that litigants should not suffer on account of their inability to approach the courts of law, and are not deprived of the benefits of the interim orders granted by the High Court, subordinate Courts, District Council Courts and the tribunals.
The court said that all interim orders/directions, including any order requiring compliance by the parties to such proceedings, passed by the High Court, all the subordinate courts, district council courts and all other Tribunals in the state, over which the high court has power of superintendence, that were subsisting as on March 20, will stand extended till April 30, unless vacated or modified earlier or until further orders of the court.
The court, however, made it clear that those interim orders/ directions which are not of a limited duration and are to operate until further orders will remain unaffected.“All orders passed by the courts exercising criminal jurisdiction having granted bail or anticipatory bail, parole and others for a limited period which are likely to expire on or before April 30 will stand extended till April 30 subject to any orders passed by the forums even before the expiry date or, thereafter, to enable the respective courts to deal with any abuse of the orders of the concerned party”, the court said.The order also said if the state government or any of its departments and functionaries, Central government and its departments or functionaries or any public sector undertaking or any public or private company or any firm or any individual or person want to carry out certain direction in a particular manner in a time frame which is going to expire at any time before April 14, such time will be extended upto April 30. “It can also be clarified that in case the extension of the interim orders cause undue hardship of any extreme nature to any of the parties to such proceedings or a matter of extreme urgency being indicated by the state or its authorities, they would be at liberty to seek appropriate relief as may be advised”, the court said.
