IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 338 of 1997 For Approval and Signature: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO of the judgement? 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder? 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the concerned : NO Magistrate/Magistrates,Judge/Judges,Tribunal/Tribunals? -------------------------------------------------------------- MAJORR MAHAJAN MANDAL Versus STATE OF GUJARAT -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: 1. Special Civil Application No. 338 of 1997 MR AK CLERK for Petitioner No. 1-2 MR AY KOGJE AGP for Respondent No. 1 RULE SERVED BY DS for Respondent No. 2 MR MD PANDYA for Respondent No. 3-4 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA Date of decision: 22/12/2004 ORAL JUDGEMENT 1. This petition under Article 226 was filed with a prayer to reconnect the power supply to Navsari Cotton & Silk Mills Ltd. and to restrain respondent Nos.3 and 4 from transferring the power connection of that mill to any person or party. 2. By way of ad-interim relief, respondent No.3 was directed not to transfer the power supply of the mill to any other person or unit. After that order dated 16.1.1997, the petition was admitted on 8.8.1997 with a further direction to respondent Nos.1 and 2 to consider, if any financial assistance/concession could be given to the petitioner for the purpose of restoring the power connection. Thereafter, the petition does not appear to have been heard or pressed for any further relief. As stated by learned counsel Mr Clerk appearing for the petitioner, according to the report last received by him, the petition was not required to be pressed for any relief at this stage and the petition could be disposed as having become infructuous with liberty to revive the same in case of difficulty. 3. The petition is accordingly disposed as having become infructuous with liberty to revive in case of difficulty. Rule is discharged with no order as to costs. (D.H. WAGHELA,J.) zgs/-