WP(C) 2500/2008 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA Heard Mr. P.J. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner as wel l as Ms R. Chakraborty, learned Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate, Assam. The petitioner is a sitting lessee of a weekly market called Dem ow Weekly Market for the period from 23.12.2007 to 30.6.2008 on weekly payment o f Rs.1350/-. The order of settlement was passed on 23.12.2007 and the petitione r accepted the same. He has been operating the market on the basis of the said o rder, the term of which will expire on 30.6.2008. According to the petitioner, since he could not get possession o f the market because of the ongoing litigation, he should be given the full term of one year. The respondents have already issued tender notice dated 22..5.200 8 for settlement of the market for the period from 1.7.2008 to 30.6.2009. The l ast date of receipt of the tender has been fixed as 20.6.2008. This writ petiti on has been filed on 13.6.2008, just at the eve of the last of acceptance of the tender. Mr. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the representation made by the petitioner vide Annexure-’E’ and ’F’ dated 3.1.2008 and 22.5.2008 are required to be disposed of by the respondent-authority. He h as also referred to the Annexure-’H’ representation dated 5.6.2008. According t o him, the respondents before taking any final decision on the basis of the im pugned NIT, should take a decision on the aforesaid representations made by the petitioner for providing full term of the settlement period. Ms Chakraborty, learned Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate, Assam opposing the aforesaid prayer, submits that the petitioner by way of filing the writ pe tition after issuance of the NIT, cannot thwart the tender process. She submits that for better revenue, the market is required to be settled through a fresh tender process initiated by Annexure-’G’ NIT dated 22.5.2008. It is always advisable to make settlement through tender process , which the respondents have already initiated by the aforesaid tender notice da ted 22.5.2008. The prayer of the petitioner not to finalize the tender process before taking any decision on his representations, cannot be granted, which will prejudice the tender process already initiated. The petitioner accepted the te rms of settlement and now, has filed the instant writ petition claiming further extension in the name of the full term of the lease period. In view of the above, while not interferring with the tender not ice dated 22.5.2008, this writ petition is disposed of providing that it will be open for the respondents to dispose of the representations of the petitioner, r eferred to above. Writ petition is disposed of.