JUDGMENT : Biswanath Somadder, J. By consent of the parties, the appeal is treated as on day's list and taken up for consideration along with the application for stay. 2. The instant appeal arises out of an order dated 10th January, 2019, passed by a learned Single Judge in W. P. 159 (W) 2019 (Sandeepan Kumar Dhar vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.). By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge was pleased to direct the writ petition to be heard finally upon exchange of affidavits but was not inclined to pass any interim order, since work order had already been issued in favour of the private respondent no. 5. 3. The instant appeal has been preferred by the writ petitioner. 4. 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. That apart and in any event, the impugned order is supported with cogent and justifiable reasons. 5. At the time of hearing of the appeal, we have come to learn that the concerned respondent authority is yet to file any affidavit-in-opposition although the timeframe as fixed by the learned Single Judge has already expired. We do not take this attitude of the concerned authority of the State kindly. It was the bounden duty of the concerned authority of the State to file the affidavit-in-opposition in time, so that the writ petition could be disposed of at an early date. We, therefore, direct the concerned authority of the State to file the affidavit-in-opposition before the writ Court positively within a period of a fortnight from date. Reply, if any, within a week therefrom. 6. The writ petition shall be listed before the learned Single Judge having determination immediately upon expiry of the timeframe for exchange of affidavits as specified hereinabove, subject, of course, to the business and convenience of the Court. 7. The appeal and the application for stay stand disposed of accordingly. 8. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the learned advocates for the parties. Arindam Mukherjee, J. : I agree.