Heard Mr. A. K. Phukan, learned counsel for the appellants and Ms. B. Dutta, learned Govt. Advocate, Meghalaya, appearing for respondents Nos. 1 to 4 and Mr. M. Z. Ahmed, learned counsel for respondent No. 5. 2. The appellants have filed a writ petition in the High Court along with an application for stay. The learned Single Judge after hearing the matter on stay granted ex parte interim stay on 26.4.2002. The respondents entered appearance and moved applications dated 5.5.2002 and 7.5.2002 under Article 226(3) of the Constitution of India for vacating the ex parte interim stay granted in favour of the appellants/petitioners. The applications under Article 226(3) of the Constitution of India could not come for hearing and since 14 days had expired before the matter could come up for hearing, the interim stay granted by the Court was vacated by order dated 24.5.2002. Later, the appellants/petitioners have again moved an application for grant of stay on 30.5.2002. The learned Single Judge dismissed this application by order dated 30.5.2002 on the ground that the second application of the petitioners for grant of stay cannot be entertained as the first application stood rejected by operation of the provisions of Article 226(3) of the Constitution of India. The learned Single Judge has also held that he cannot sit as an appellate court over the decision rendered on 24.5.2002. Consequently, the application filed by the appellants/petitioners was rejected. 3. Aggrieved by the said order passed by the learned Single Judge, this appeal is filed. 4. The petitioners'/appellants' application for stay was rejected on account of the fact that the matter could not be listed for hearing for vacation of the interim stay order granted in favour of the petitioners/appellants on the applications moved by the respondents under Article 226(3) of the Constitution of India within 14 days, as contemplated under Article 226(3) of the Constitution of India. By virtue of the provisions of Article 226(3) of the Constitution of India, the stay order granted in favour of the petitioners/appellants having not been confirmed within 14 days from the date of the application moved under Article 226(3) of the Constitution of India, stands vacated. The order of vacation of the interim stay granted in favour of the petitioners/ appellants is not the result of a decision rendered by the Courts on merits. The order of vacation of the interim stay granted in favour of the petitioners/ appellants is not the result of a decision rendered by the Courts on merits. It is by virtue of the constitutional provisions under Article 226(3) of the Constitution of India. As the order vacating the stay granted in favour of the petitioners/appellants is not an order on merits, it will not operate as a res judicata to the subsequent proceedings. 5. There is no manner of doubt that the principle of res judicata applies in the proceedings at the subsequent stage. But, that would be if have been issued on merits. In the present case, since the vacation of the order of interim stay is not the result of the directions issued by the court on merits, there is no bar for the court to entertain a second application for stay. We do not find that the Court while entertaining the second application for stay in the facts and circumstances of the case acts as an appellate court. The court exercises the powers vested in it not as an appellate court but as an original court and thus it cannot be said that the court cannot exercise the powers being an appellate court, while adjudicating upon the second application moved by the petitioners/ appellants for grant of interim stay. 6. For the reasons aforesaid, we do not agree with the order passed by the learned Single Judge, dated 30.5.2002, and it is hereby set aside. The appeal is allowed. 7. The matter be sent back to the learned Single Judge for deciding the application filed by the writ petitioners/appellants, dated 30.5.2002, on merits or to decide the writ petition itself on merits. 8. In the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.