JUDGMENT : Biswanath Somadder, J. 1. Let the affidavit-of-service filed in Court today be taken on record. 2. The appeal is treated as on day's list and taken up for consideration along with the application for stay. 3. The instant appeal arises in respect of an order dated 18th January, 2019, passed by a learned Single Judge in W. P. 24824 (W) of 2018 (Sahida Bibi @ Sahida Banu vs. The WBSEDCL & Ors.). 4. The appeal has been preferred by the writ petitioner. 5. The order dated 18th January, 2019, is setout here-in-below: - "The matter cannot be decided without exchange of affidavit. Therefore, the respondents are directed to file affidavit-in-opposition within three weeks. Reply, if any, be filed within two weeks thereafter. Let the matter appear in the Combined Monthly List of March, 2019 under the heading "Contested Application". 6. It is evident from the impugned order that the learned Single Judge has merely directed the writ petition to be heard upon exchange of affidavits. No rights of the parties have been decided. 7. In an Intra-Court Mandamus Appeal, interference is usually warranted only when palpable infirmities or perversities are noticed on a plain reading of the impugned order. We do not notice any such palpable infirmity or perversity on a plain reading of the impugned order. 8. The appeal and the application for stay are liable to be dismissed on this ground alone and stand accordingly dismissed. (Arindam Mukherjee, J.) - I agree.