IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 689 of 2004. Date of decision: 7.9.2009 Shri Makhan Singh Mann. …. Petitioner Versus Union of India & ors. ….. Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, J. The Hon’ble Mr.Justice V.K.Ahuja, J. Whether approved for reporting ? No For the petitioner: Sh.B.C.Negi, Advocates. For the respondents: Shri Anup Rattan, Central Government Counsel, for respondents No.1 and 3. Shri G.C.Gupta, Sr.Advocate with Sh.Pawan Sharma, counsel, for respondent No.2. Sh.Tarlok Chauhan, counsel for respondent No.4. _____________________________________________________ Deepak Gupta, J.(Oral) This present writ petition was filed by the petitioner wherein it is claimed that the respondents who are agencies owned and controlled by the Government have totally flouted the law and opened a retail outlet (Petrol-pump) in total violation of the guidelines and 2 instructions laid down by the Ministry of Road, Transport and Highways. The grievance of the petitioner is that there is a sharp curve near the spot where the retail outlet has been opened and that this retail outlet is likely to cause hindrance to the traffic and, in fact, is a great traffic hazard. The petition was filed in the year 2004. It was admitted by the respondents that they had not obtained the requisite permission from the Ministry of Road, Transport and Highways, as required under law. We had given time to the respondents time and again to ensure that the road is widened and the traffic hazard is removed. When this was not done vide order dated 17th September, 2008, we had while admitting the petition directed that the respondents No.2 and 4 shall forthwith cease to operate or run the retail outlet at Maranda on the Mandi-Pathankot National Highway No.20. It is apparent that during the pendency of this petition, the respondents No.2 and 4 had been approaching all the authorities concerned for felling of trees and widening of the road. There were a few trees on the hillock which was causing the blind curve. These 3 trees have now been felled and the hillock itself has been removed. Now the respondent No.4 has filed a supplementary affidavit showing the status report. Alongwith this status report, photographs of the area have been annexed depicting the situation of the road prior to the filing of the petition, the action taken during the writ petition etc. These photographs clearly show that the trees have been felled and the hillock has been removed. Now there is no blind curve near the retail outlet in question. Last photograph clearly shows that the road has now been widened substantially and there is no blind curve. Even the Assistant Engineer, National Highways, H.P.PWD, Sub Division, Baijnath, District Kangra has issued a letter to the Managing Director, H.P Agro Industries Corporation Ltd., Nigam Vihar Complex, Shimla stating therein that the hillock has been cut and the curve has been improved which now confirms with Clause 4.1 of Ministry of Road, Transport and Highways Guidelines. In view of the latest developments, we feel that there is no reason to extend the stay order any further and the stay order is accordingly vacated. In fact, now the writ petition itself does not survive because this was the main relief claimed in the writ petition. The writ 4 petition is, therefore, disposed of. We however, make it clear that the appropriate authority of the respondent No.3 shall consider the case of respondents No.2 and 4 strictly in accordance with law. No order as to costs. Dasti copy. ( Deepak Gupta ) Judge September 7, 2009 (V.K.Ahuja) (m) Judge