MMJ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (L) NO.247 OF 2010 M/s. Economic Commercial Service through it’s proprietor Shri Lalit Hindocha ..Petitioners vs. Union of India & Ors. ..Respondents Ms N.V. Masurkar i/b Mr. Sandeep Wasnik for the Petitioners Mr. Suresh Kumar for the Respondents CORAM : J. N. PATEL & A.P. BHANGALE, JJ. DATE : 13th APRIL, 2010 P.C. : 1. The learned Counsel appearing for the respondents, after seeking instructions states that the respondents have decided to grant extension to the contractors like the petitioners in terms of clause 20.0 and 20.1 of the Lease Contract Agreement entered into between them and to continue their contract for further period till finalisation of the new contract as a policy decision. Clause 20.0 and 20.1 reads as under: “20.0Extension to lease contract: 20.1 Extension of lease is permissible only in case of long term lease of 3 years wherein the same can be extended only once, by 2 more years at a lease rate of 25% more than the lumpsum-leased freight rate subject to satisfactory performance by the leaseholder, without any penalty for overloading or violation of any provision of the contract.” 2. It is categorically stated that this decision has been taken by the respondents and would be applicable to all such contractors like the petitioners, whose contract period has come to an end and as per the policy decision, new tenders are being invited for the said Lease Contract. We accept the statement on behalf of the respondents. 3. In view of the aforesaid statement, the petitioners would be entitled to continue their contract till finalisation of the new contract by the respondents. Needless to say the petitioners would be eligible to participate in the tenders to be invited for awarding the lease contract. 4. In view of the above, the interest of the petitioners stands protected under the contract. We, therefore, accordingly disposed of this petition. ( J. N. PATEL, J.) ( A.P. BHANGALE, J.)