JUDGMENT : Biswanath Somadder, J. 1. By consent of the parties, the appeal is treated as on day's list and taken up for consideration along with the application for appropriate order. 2. The instant appeal arises out of an order dated 19th February, 2019, passed by a learned Single Judge in WP 1591 (W) of 2019 (Medium Packaging Pvt. Ltd. vs. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. & Ors.). By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge directed the parties to exchange their affidavits and granted liberty to mention for early hearing, upon exchange of affidavits. 3. The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant/writ petitioner. 4. For convenience, the entire order is reproduced here-in-below in its entirety:- "A tender process is under challenge at the behest of the participants in such tender process. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that, the terms and conditions of the tender process were changed subsequent to the issuance of the tender so as to favour the private respondents. This contention is denied by the private respondents. In such circumstances, it would be appropriate to permit the parties to file affidavits. Let affidavit-in-opposition be filed within four weeks from date. Reply thereto, if any, be filed within two weeks thereafter. Liberty is given to the parties to mention for early hearing." 5. Learned advocate representing the appellant/writ petitioner submits that the reason for preferring this appeal is due to non-grant of an ad interim order in his client's favour. 6. Learned advocate representing the Indian Oil Corporation Limited submits, on instruction, that a work order has already been issued in favour of the private respondent no.6 in the meanwhile. 7. Considering the respective contentions of the parties, we are of the view that since the subject-matter of challenge before the writ Court is a tender process based on which the work order has been issued, such issuance of the work order in favour of the private respondent no.6 shall abide by the result of the writ petition. The respondent Indian Oil Corporation Limited shall disclose before the First Court, in its affidavit, the reasons as to why the private respondent no.6 was considered to be qualified for the purpose of issuance of the work order. It shall also disclose before the First Court the reasons as to why the appellant/writ petitioner was considered as not being qualified for the reverse auction. 8. It shall also disclose before the First Court the reasons as to why the appellant/writ petitioner was considered as not being qualified for the reverse auction. 8. We also propose to modify the directions for exchange of affidavits in the manner as indicated here-in-below. 9. Let affidavit-in-opposition be filed within a period of three weeks from date. Reply thereto, if any, be filed a week thereafter. 10. Immediately upon exchange of affidavits, the appellant/writ petitioner will be at liberty to mention for early hearing of the matter before the First Court having appropriate determination. 11. With the above observations/directions, the appeal and the application for appropriate order stand disposed of. 12. Urgent photostat certified copy of this judgment, if applied for, be given to the learned advocates for the parties. Arindam Mukherjee, J. - I agree.