\vs \0'" tv^ff a Cf riii^i^i us-, M/s Singhal Enterprises, Havlng its UA^--^ f^s^^^ -* Sr ^^.^.^ OA^^ rM^^/. ncsiu ^-/iiE^CT <ai py-r^te^s nuau ^•n^s?; Sokaro Steel City, Jharkhand and Camp Offlce at IViinocha Co'iony, Opposits Vidya Gardsn, Bilaspur ./ifsenn'l //^t-,L^^^:^,^^,s,E-*\ Ai-,»—, ,—i-, ;^.n 4y3UuT (Linnaiiisgarnj inrougn 'is Partner RK A.arawal Union of India through the Secretary, IViinistry' of Urban Deveiopment, New 2 Superintending Engineer, Bhopal Centrai- Circle, CentraS Pubiic Worte Department, Nirman ^adan Arera !ii!<-> Di-t^"t-) /H4Q'1 IftiiS; DtELfUizEt (JVEr 3 Executive Engineer, Raipur Division Central Pubiic Works Department, CD Slock, 3rd Fioor, Room No.304-305, Centrai Excise .& Customs Office, Tikarapara, Raipur (Chhattisgarh; Writ petition under Article'22S ofthe Constitution of indla 'resent : Shri Ashish Shrivastava, counsel for t'ne petitioner. Shri Abhishek Stnha, counsei forthe respondents. NoveiTiber, 200°) 'he following order of the Court was passed b^ Rajeev ^SBB' Shri Abhishek Sinha, iearned counsel for the resDondents submits that during .the' pendency of the writ petition, the {-^ respondents have awarded the contract in Question to M/s Patel bnterpnses. 2) In view of the above development during She pendencv of the writ petition, the petitioner will be required to impiead M/s PsEet interprises as respondent in the writ petition and so also amendmentofsubstantialnaturewould be necessary. 3) We are, therefore, of the opinion that it would be sppropriate for the petitioner to flle a fresh writ petition for the reiiefs sought in this writ petition and other ancillary reliefs impleading M/s Patet Enterprises also as one of the respondents. 4) VVith the above liberty, the writDetition isdismissed. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge patims