Judgment Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, J. This writ petition is directed against an order passed by the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal, First Bench on 12th March, 2014 in tribunal application being O.A. 1505/2013 (LRTT) filed by the petitioners. It is submitted by Mr. Mahata, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners that his clients filed the said tribunal application seeking two-fold reliefs. His clients prayed for issuance of direction upon the respondent no.5 for supply of a copy of the application which was submitted by the respondent no.5 before the concerned B.L.&L.R.O. Mr. Mahata submits that the said relief was granted by the Learned Tribunal to his clients. Mr. Mahata further submits that the other relief which his clients prayed for i.e., analogous hearing of three proceedings, viz. (i) filed by the petitioners, (ii) filed by the respondent no.5 herein and (iii) filed by the respondent no.9 herein, was not allowed by the Learned Tribunal by the impugned order. Hence his clients have filed the instant writ petition before us. Though the application which was submitted by the petitioners before the Learned Tribunal and the application which was submitted by the respondent no.9 herein before the concerned authority have been annexed to this writ petition, but the application which was submitted by the respondent no.5 herein before the concerned authority has not been annexed to this writ petition. As a result, we are unable to ascertain the case made out by the respondent no.5 herein in his said application and the relief claimed therein. Without ascertaining the relief which the respondent no.5 claimed in his said application and the basis and/or foundation of such relief made out in the said application, we are unable to allow the petitioners’ prayer for consolidation of those three petitions filed by the respective parties for hearing. Under such circumstances, we dispose of this writ petition by directing the concerned B.L.&L.R.O. to consider as to whether for the sake of convenience of disposal of all those three applications and also for avoiding conflict of decision, those three applications filed by the respective parties are required to be considered simultaneously by the concerned B.L.&L.R.O. or not. Under such circumstances, we dispose of this writ petition by directing the concerned B.L.&L.R.O. to consider as to whether for the sake of convenience of disposal of all those three applications and also for avoiding conflict of decision, those three applications filed by the respective parties are required to be considered simultaneously by the concerned B.L.&L.R.O. or not. In the event, the concerned B.L.&L.R.O. finds that for the sake of convenience of disposal of all those three applications and for avoiding conflict of decision, all those three applications submitted by the parties are required to be considered analogously, the concerned B.L.&L.R.O. will pass necessary order and dispose of those three applications on their own merit after consolidating those three applications for hearing. The writ petition is, thus, disposed of. Let the affidavit-of-service filed in Court today, be kept with the record. Ishan Chandra Das, J. : I agree.