S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2611/02. Prem Chand Gupta Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. 22.02.2007 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq Mr. Rajendra Soni for petitioner. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 22.2.02 whereby his earlier tender submitted in pursuance of the advertisement for inviting tender dated 24.10.01 was rejected as he did not get his firm registered for obtaining RST and CST numbers. According to the petitioner, such a condition was not indicated in the notice inviting tender dated 24.10.01. The respondent in the reply however submitted that as per the General Finance and Accounts Rules, the RST/CST registration and Income tax clearance is a mandatory condition for doing transactions with the Government. From the perusal of the para 14 of the reply, it appears that when the second notice inviting tender was published by respondent on 1.4.2002, the petitioner again applied and at that time also he stood as the highest bidder and, therefore, contract was awarded to him and an agreement was executed providing 45% commission on the drugs. In view of the subsequent developments, when the work in question itself was awarded to the petitioner, now there remains nothing to be decided in the writ petition. The writ petition has become infructuous and the same is therefore dismissed. (Mohammad Rafiq),J. At/-