@ HEGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition No.2518l2003 DB: Hon’ble Shri Sunil Kumar Sinha, J, 85 Han’bEe Shri Raieshwar LaE Jhanwar,J. PETETEQNER Electronic & Engineering Co.(I) Pvt. Ltd. 8, Jyotiwire HouSE, 2nd Floor, Near Koisite, 01f V€era D€sai Road, Andheri (West), Mumbai— 400 O53. Versus RESPONDENTS: 1. Steel Authority of India Ltd., Bhilaj Ste€l Plant, Bhilai- 49000 1, District Durg, Chhattisgarh (Through Managing Director) 2'. Th6 Chairmall, Steel Authority of India, Ltd., Ispat Bhavan, Lodi Road, Now Delhi— 110 003. QO NDT Technologies Inc. 20, 275 Clark Graham Bale Durfew Quebec, Monueal, QC, H9 X 3T5 CANADA, (Through General Manager) Beekay Engineering Corporation 45,147, Industn'al State Bhilai 490026, District Durg(CG) WRIT PETITEGN UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTXON OF INDIA Appearance: S111“; Pallav Mishra, Advocate for the petitioner. Shrl Sanjay Kumar Agrawal, Advocate for respondents No. 1 & 2. 3&4. Shri Asbish Shrivastava, Advocate for respondents No. 2 W.P.N0§.2518/2003 ORAL ORDER (10.09.2009) Fer Sunih Kama: Sinha, J. Heard. Shri Sanjay Kumar Agrawal, learned counsel appearing 011 behajf of mspondénts No. 1 and ‘2 submits that a written communication has boen received from respondents No. 1 and 2 that the contract has been completed on 29.7.2004, therefore, nothing survives in this petition and it has become infmctuous. /m Sht‘i Pallav Mishra pleads no instructions. Since nobody is appearing to press this petition on merits, we are left with no other way except to dismiss the petition for want of prosecution. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/- R.L. Jhanwar Judge sal- ‘Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge sunim