MC 439/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. BARUAH. Heard Mr. R. L. Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Mr. N. Deka, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2. By this application the applicant has sought for vacation of the interi m relief provided vide order dated 23-12-2010 passed in WP (c) No. 6854 of 201 0, whereby and whereunder all further proceedings of Complaint Case No. 752 of 2 009 under Section 138 of N.I. Act, pending in the Court of the learned Sr. Civi l Judge-cum-Rent Controller, Room No. 305, 2nd Floor (North West) District Court s Rohini/Delhi are directed to be remained stayed with a rider that the responde nts would remain at liberty to move this court for vacating/modifying/ altering of the interim directions. Having equipped with this liberty given to the respondents, respondents filed this application for vacation of the interim order. Taking recourse to the Clause 3 of Article 226 of the Constitution, it i s submitted by Mr. R. L. Yadav, learned counsel for the respondents herein that such application shall have to be disposed of within a period of two weeks from the date of service of notice on the respondents. It is an admitted fact that af ter the date of receipt of the notice two weeks time has already been expired an d in that view of the matter, clause 3 of Article 226 will hold the field. This misc. case accordingly stands dismissed.