Judgment : The Court: In view of the decision dated May 14, 2013 I gave in a W P No.968(W) of 2013 (Manik Chandra Paul v. State of West Bengal & Ors.), Mr. Bihani appearing for the Municipality has submitted that the order dated January 22, 2013 (W P p.42) impugning which this W P has been brought cannot be defended. The petitioner’s request for renewal of certificate of enlistment has been rejected by the impugned order that was prepared and signed by an advocate. The Executive Officer merely signed the order as if he were the mute second member of a forum presided over by the advocate. The impugned order cannot be sustained. For these reasons, I set aside the impugned order and direct the Chairperson of the Municipality to see that the petitioner’s application for renewal of certificate of enlistment is decided by an Executive Officer other than the one who signed the impugned order with the advocate, after hearing all concerned within four weeks from the date this order is served. No costs.