%i¥GH €§URT GF €HHA?T%$GARH : BILASPUR WW? PETI'HGN NQ 448$ GF 2004 ?E?%TEQNER M/s Expert Aryan Security $ervices, A groprietorship Firm, through its Soie Pmmietar, Majer {Rem} Shyam Sundar SEarma, S/o Late Shri Shea Narayan 3 :‘sgh, agaa‘ ahaut 48 yaat's, Permanent Rr’o H55, Manaj Vihar, lndirapuram. Ghaziabad — 231 Q10, Distrigt Ghaziabad (UP). Vefsus E§$§§§N5EF€T$ N 1. Saum Easterri Coamelds Ltd. threugh its Qhief Genera! Manager, Kusmunda Are; gr-(u’s‘murriia. Di$%rict Kmba {CG}. Wm {sireéior Gerreral 0f Resettlement. Qgxrgmment of lndia, Ministry of Defenca, Wes? gawk — IV, RK. Puram, New Semi—66, (Wrii pefiriora under Article 226/227 of the Consiitutian 6f maria) 5mgle Bench : Han’hle Shri Satish K. AgnEhetri, J. Preseat := 3hr? F. Qiwakar, $r. Adwncate Wat: Shri Aem Mirarraz & 5hr§ l. Lakra, Advecatee: far tha petitioner. “Shri RS. Kashy, counse! fer the respcndent MM. $rrri Vimy’ Hark, 3r, Aé’vacate with Shri $arryakam M‘ahra, Agxelegaig {or the rg$§agnden£ Ngg. sriri $ha$hank Tmmr, siermsaE far the interwner —~ MIS gagggv Sgauréi’y Sewige§ =3: Anather V umi §§EER {Passed on this 21 $§ day of Jahuary, 26%) Wm irre canaérri 6f learned ceunse! appearing fer the pariiee, the peiiiiorx is iiearri r'iriaiiy. 2) Siiri fiiwakar. ieamezi senior counsei appearing for the netitiener submite that the petitiener impugns the order dated 18-10-2804 hyvwhich the agreement dated t§-6—2004 hae been terminated on the ground that the eetitiener nee been de-paneied by‘the Directer General of Resettiement {DGR}. This Court by order dated 30-11-2004 etayed the erder dated ia-tQ-2004. Learned eeuneei submits that theperiod of agreernent has come te an end and by virtue ef the stay order dated 36-11-2004 granted thy this Ceurt, the petitiener has carried out the Vwerk fer the period granted r to nine. 'fhue, se far ae ehaitenge to the erder Idated 18-10-2004 r: eeneerned. the petittoner deee net want to press tee prayer eiause 7.1 ee zha same has bécome infruatuous. However, the secand impugned ordey {iatea 2-1 0-2064 (sic 2-9-2004) (Annexure-PM) whereby the petitianer has béen ae-panéled £3 mncemed, the same still survives far consideratian. 3; $hri Ham, learned semor counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent N62 submits that the ante? dated 2-10-2004 (sic 2-9-2004) (Annexure-PM) shall not be given effect ta, as the operation of the saiu etder was stayed hy this Ceurt vide arder dated 30—11-2004. The respendent N92 shatl not insist an cempliance at the saiot order, however, tiberty may be reserved to take fresh action, if necessary, on merit, after foliowing due process of taw as per the prescribed provisions. 4} in vtew of the above mentioned elear statement made by learned counsel for the respondent No.2 the second relief sought by the petitioner hes aiso become intructuous. ‘5‘; Acoordingiy. this petition is dismissed as having become inirdotuous, with the above stated liberty. 6‘} Consequently, interim order passed earlier stands discharged and M.{W.).P.Nos.4823r’2004, 4963:2004, 49899004 3x 507312004 and other pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. / 2/ Sdl- sadsh K. Agiehw‘ Judge Gowri