HC-NIC C/WPPIL/191/2015 ORDER was not permissible, because if we consider the notification, it is for alleged misuse of social media. As per the learned counsel, certain social media sites could be blocked, even if the purpose was to be achieved by exercise of the power, like Twitter, Face Book, WhatsApp etc. but complete blockage of access to internet through mobile could not be said as warranted in law. As per the petitioner, except the broadband, all internet facilities on mobile phones were blocked, hence such would not even meet with the minimal restriction to the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 19(1) of the Constitution. It was submitted that even if the exercise of power under Section 144 of the Code has lived the life, such would not make the petition infructuous nor it can be said to be a mere academic exercise. When a fundamental right is breached and even if challenge is at a later stage, the Court would not decline examination of the challenge merely on the ground that the notification has lived the life. It was also submitted that if such action is found to be bad in law and declared as illegal, in the recent future, when the apprehension has been voiced by the petitioner, such power may not be exercised again which may result into the breach of fundamental right. It was submitted that whenever alleged breach of fundamental right is brought before the Court, it would be for the government officials to satisfy this Court that circumstances did exist and they remained within the bounds of Page 3 of 15 Page 3 of 15 Created On Thu Sep 17 08:11:45 IST 2015