1. S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.6303/2007 (Arya U-Clix e-Services Vs. Secretary, Department of Information Technology & Communication & Ors.) Date of order :: 14.3.2008 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS Mr. Vinay Shrivastava, for the petitioner. Mr. B.L. Tiwari, Dy. Govt. Counsel. Heard learned counsel for the parties. By way of filing the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the notices dated 25.8.2007 (Annexure-7 & 8) whereby the petitioner's contract work was suspended. During the pendency of this writ petition, the contract was restored by the respondents and a liberty was given to the petitioner to file representation to the respondents. It is stated at Bar by learned counsel for the parties that representation was filed by the petitioner in pursuance of the order dated 19.11.2007 passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and upon that representation, the District Collector has passed a fresh order on 29.11.2007 (Annexure-23). 1. By way of filing second stay petition, the petitioner has challenged the said order dated 29.11.2007 (Annexure-23) as well as the subsequent order dated 16.2.2008 (Annexure-25), which has been passed upon the representation filed by the petitioner in pursuance of the order of this Court. Now, the District Collector has passed final order, therefore, the petitioner is required to challenge the said order by way of filing fresh writ petition and this writ petition has become infructuous. In the circumstances when the writ petition itself has become infructuous, no order is required to be passed on second stay application. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous with the liberty to the petitioner to challenge the orders Annexure-23 to 25. In case, the petitioner files fresh writ petition to challenge the aforesaid order, the respondents will also be at liberty to raise all objections including the maintainability of the writ petition. (GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS), J. arun