LPA No. 2340 of 2011 -1- In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh LPA No. 2340 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 23.12.2011 State of Punjab & another ....... Petitioners Versus Manjit Singh Sethi and others ........ Respondents Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice M.M. Kumar Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Narain Raina **** Present : Mr. Amol Rattan, Addl. A.G., Punjab for the appellants. Mr. R.S. Rai, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Harsimran Singh Sethi, Advocate and Mr. Ashish Chopra, Advocate for the intervener. **** 1. To be referred to the reporters or not ? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest? M.M. Kumar, J. 1. The instant Letter Patents Appeal under Clause X of the Letter Patent is directed against the interlocutory order dated 25.11.2011, while issuing notice of motion for 9.1.2012 the learned Single Judge has granted the stay order by following the order passed in a connected matter namely, CWP No. 14023 of 2011. 2. Mr. Amol Rattan, Addl. A.G., Punjab appearing for the appellants has stated that the Municipal Corporation, Mohali has been functioning as such for the last 11 months and the stay order would not be sustainable. LPA No. 2340 of 2011 -2- 3. It appears that neither any reply has been filed by the appellant-State nor any application bringing aforesaid facts seeking vacation of stay order has been filed. We deem it appropriate to relegate the appellant-State to file appropriate application before the learned Single Judge detailing all the facts seeking vacation of the stay order. The Letter Patent appeal would not be an appropriate remedy against every interlocutory order, especially, when material facts have not been brought before the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, we leave it open to the appellant-State to file appropriate application before learned Single Judge for the relief which is sought in the instant appeal. 4. The appeal stand disposed of in the above terms. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (RAJIV NARAIN RAINA) JUDGE 23.12.2011 'sp'