IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO. 2814 OF 2005 PETITION NO. 2814 OF 2005 PETITION NO. 2814 OF 2005 Yezdi Patel ... Petitioner V/s. Airport Authority of India & Ors... Respondents Mr. Bhavin Bhatia i/b. P.L. Singh for petitioner. Mr. P.K. Sandani, Sr. Counsel with Mr. H Rehman i/b. M.V. Kini & Co. for respondent No. 1. Mr. Vinay J. Hegde for respondent No. 3. CORAM CORAM CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & : F.I. REBELLO & : F.I. REBELLO & ANOOP ANOOP ANOOP V. MOHTA,JJ. V. MOHTA,JJ. V. MOHTA,JJ. DATED DATED DATED : 6th November, 2006 : 6th November, 2006 : 6th November, 2006 P.C. . The counsel holding for Adv. Bhavin Bhatia seeks adjournment on the ground that Mr. Singh is not available. 2. The matter pertains to tenders which were issued by Air Port Authority of India. It is pointed out that the highest tenderer did not accept the bid and in terms of guidelines respondent No. 4 could not award the tender to the second highest bidder. 3. Pursuant to the privatisation at Mumbai Air Port, now the guidelines are not applicable as a new company has been entrusted the work in the area previously under the control of respondent No. 5. ( 2 ) Considering that, the petition has become infructuous and dismissed accordingly. 4. In the cause title the respondent Nos. 1,2 & 3 have been wrogly described as respondent Nos. 4,5 & 6. We have therefore referred to the respondents in the context in which their names appear in the cause title. [F.I. [F.I. [F.I. REBELLO, J.] REBELLO, J.] REBELLO, J.] [ANOOP [ANOOP [ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.] V. MOHTA, J.] V. MOHTA, J.]