IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 46 OF 2006 SHRI MICHAEL PEREIRA, PONDA, GOA. ....Petitioner Versus GOA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ....Respondents CORPORATION LTD., THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR AND ANR., Mr. Amey Kakodker, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. M. S. Sonak, Advocate for Respondent no.1. Respondent no.2 present in person. Coram:- SMT. RANJANA DESAI & N. A. BRITTO, JJ. Date:- 19th June, 2006 P.C. We heard this petition for sometime. Respondent no.2, Mahesh G. Naik, who is present in the Court and to whom respondent no.1 has awarded tender, made a statement that he is not interested in running the canteen of respondent no.1 as according to him, it is in a dilapidated condition. In view of this, this Petition does not survive and is disposed of as infructuous. Needless to say, if respondent no.1 invites fresh tenders and the petitioner applies for the same, his case may be considered on merits. SMT. RANJANA DESAI, J. N. A. BRITTO, J. arp/*