IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CIVIL APPLICATION (CAW) NO.1925 OF 2010 IN WRIT PETITION NO.1715 OF 2009(D). (M/S. SELL ADS, NAGPUR...VS... NAGPUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & OTHERS.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Courts orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders and Registrar’s orders. CORAM : A.P.LAVANDE AND P.D.KODE, JJ. DATED : AUGUST 03, 2010. Heard Mr. S.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants/original respondents No.1, 2 and 3 and Mr. A.A. Naik, learned counsel for the original petitioner. By this application respondents No.1 to 3 seeks modification of order dated 17th August, 2009 by which Writ Petition No.1715/2009 was disposed of in terms of the statement made by Mr. Mishra the learned counsel appearing for respondents No.1 to 3 to the effect that the tenders in question were recalled by respondent No.1 and respondent No.1 would invite fresh tenders in respect of Group-I. According to respondents No.1 to 3 prayer made by the petitioner was only in respect of Group-I, Designs No.1 and 2 and therefore, order dated 17th August, 2009 which relates to all the designs is beyond the scope of the petition and therefore, deserves to be modified. According to Mr. Mishra, the petitioner has only sought relief in respect of Designs No.1 and 2 of Group-I, which position has been disputed by Mr. Naik learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Mishra, upon taking instruction from the respondents states that out of 40 designs 30 designs have been already allotted to the successful bidders and remaining 10 designs are going to be re- tendered. This position has been disputed by Mr. Naik, learned counsel for the petitioner. Be that as it may, we have no reason to disbelieve the statement made by Mr. Mishra that 30 designs have already been allotted to successful bidders and 10 designs would be re-tendered. In view of above, order dated 17th August, 2010 is modified to the extent of tenders in respect of design Nos. 1 and 2, Group-I. However, it is made clear that all the rights and contentions of the petitioner are kept open and the petitioner is at liberty to avail appropriate remedy as may be available in law. The application stands disposed of accordingly. JUDGE JUDGE RR.