circumstances and the Tribunal chooses to adopt one such view, which is not absurd or irrational, the High Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction would not substitute its view for the view taken by the Tribunal. 4. Having regard to the reason assigned by the Tribunal, we were inclined not to interfere. However, what impels us to grant interim relief in favour of the petitioners is that although the Tribunal had fixed January 21, 2022 as the next date for consideration of the original application and the respondents in the original application were directed to file reply affidavits within such date, we are informed by Mr. Dere, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners that reply affidavits were not filed and today, on the request of the advocate appearing for the Commission, the Tribunal has granted further 4 (four) weeks’ time to file a reply affidavit. If indeed the Commission was diligent and filed the reply affidavit by the time stipulated by the order dated December 24, 2021, we would not be unreasonable in assuming that the original application could have been finally decided prior to January 29, 2022. However, it is the lack of diligence of the Commission that has resulted in the Tribunal adjourning the proceedings till February 22, 2022 by which time further examination scheduled on January 29, 2022 would be conducted. If the petitioners are not allowed to participate in such examination but ultimately, they succeed in the original application, the situation would certainly become complicated thereby putting the process of
