IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1267 OF 2008 (MS) Raj Kumar …………Petitioner. Versus State of Uttarakhand and others. ……Respondents. Mr. Lalit Sharma, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. K.P. Upadhyay, Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for State of Uttarakhand / respondent no. 1. Mr. R.K. Raizada, Advocate for respondent no. 2, 3 and 4. 1st May, 2009 Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. Sri R.K. Raizada, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2, 3 and 4 has made a statement before this Court that the writ petition has become infructuous as the earlier contract has come to an end and the process for new contract has already been initiated and advertisement to this effect has already been published. Sri Lalit Sharma, Advocate holding brie of Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, Advocate for the petitioner also agrees with the statement given by Mr. R.K. Raizada. In view of the aforesaid statement, the writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. However, it is directed that Bazpur Cooperative Sugar Factory shall complete new process as expeditiously as possible under the law which is presently applicable in the State of Uttarakhand and shall consider all eligible bidders including the petitioner. 2 Mr. R.K. Raizada further states that the interim order dated 1st April, 2009, in which restriction has been imposed to complete process by 30th April, 2009, needs some clarification as the Bazpur Cooperative Sugar Factory has to seek permission from the Election Commission of India and there may be delay in getting such permission, therefore, it is prayed that the respondents may be allowed to complete the process within a period of three weeks from today instead of 30th April, 2009. The order dated 1st April, 2009 shall be deemed to be clarified to this extent. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 1.5.2009 Rathour