D.B. CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL NO. 377/2006 M/s Sahid Prabhu Ram Filling Station, Khinwsar vs. The Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and Ors. DATE OF ORDER :: 21.3.2007 HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJESH BALIA HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BHANWAROO KHAN Mr. G.R. Punia, for the appellant. Mr. Vijay Bishnoi, for the respondents. It is informed to learned counsel for the appellant and to the Court on 6.10.2006 that the representation which was allowed by learned Single Judge to be made by the appellant while dismissing the writ petition has been considered and rejected. Learned counsel for the appellant has taken time to seek instructions in regard to challenging the order passed on his representation. Since then matter has been adjourned times without number without any reference to the statement made on 6.10.2006. Moreover, while issuing the notice, the order dated 7.7.2006 reveals the circumstances in which the notice was issued and the interim order was made, which is reproduced as under :- “Meanwhile the order dtd.18.5.2006 (Annex.7) shall remain suspended pending consideration of the representation in light of the observations made by the learned single Judge. The appellant shall make a representation within a period of one week. If such a representation is made, the same shall be decided by the concerned authority within a period of four weeks. Interim order granted by this court shall continue until further orders.” Apparently, the appeal was kept pending consideration only for the purpose of making the representation meaningful and allowing the appellant to continue with his dealership till his representation is decided which is also apparent from the fact that Annexure-7 dated 18.5.2006 was suspended only pending consideration of the representation in the light of the observations made by the learned Single Judge. Since the representation has already been decided way-back in October, 2006, the interim order has already lived its life and is not thereafter in force. The appellant has already expressed his desire to challenge the order passed by the respondent on this representation. In that view of the matter, this appeal also does not survive for consideration and subject to the appellant's right, if any, to challenge the order passed on his representation, without expressing any opinion on the maintainability of such challenge, the appeal is dismissed. (BHANWAROO KHAN),J. (RAJESH BALIA),J. Rm/-