lN THE HIGH CoulIT OF SIKKiM ORDER SHEET WRIT PETITION (crvlL) ......... „ .... No. 26 of 2005 Petitioner / Appellant Versus sTeerE OF slKKIM a ANOTRER Bespondent \b'. I •ial Date Order witli Signature office Note ap to ` of of actlon (If any) ler Order taken on Order submitted that the petitioner has no locus-standi to question the validity of such NIT, and the awarding of the said work, inasmuch as, the petitioner is a Class I(A) category contractor and as such he can participate in the NIT or any other works for the work value of Rs.1 crore and above. Supporting his contention, Mr. Karma Thinlay had produced the related Government Notification dated 7.7.2003 pertaining to the tender limit of the contractors. We have perused it and we are of the view that this Notification is relevant and, accordingly, it is hereby formed as part of the record and marked as `x' for identification. It is also contended by Mr. Karma Thinlay that the respondent/authority followed the provision of Rule 199 of Sikkim Public Works Code of Government of Sikkim thus publishing the NIT in the Sikkim Express and the other leading newspapers. The learned Assistant Govt.Advocate has also produced the copies of the other newspapers containing the related NIT. Be that a.s it may, upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties at some length, Mr. Hamal in his usual frankness submitted that the petitioner desires to withdraw this writ petition. We are¥ering into the A, rty merit of the case as sufrice is made with the above i+ Order with Signature observation to allow the prayer of the writ petitioner to withdraw the writ petition. In the result, th`is writ petition is closed on withdrawal but, no ord'er as to costs. N.Th,Gri s:be# /N. Chic E- nd Singh ) IActin rfud9e At/ Office Note as to action (if any) taken on Order