IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 7480 of 2007. Date of Decision: 18th February, 2009. M/s Sham Lal Mohan Lal etc. ....Petitioners through Mr. Sudhir Mittal, Advocate Versus Haryana State Agricultural Marketing Board & Ors. Respondents. through Mr. Dinesh Jhangra, Advocate for respondents No. 1 and 2. Mr. Vineet Soni, Advocate for respondents No. 4 to 6. Mr. R.D.Sharma, Sr. DAG, Haryana. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? SURYA KANT, J. [ORAL) The petitioners seek a direction to the official respondents No. 1 to 3 to stop the alleged activities of respondents NO. 4 to 10 who are stated to be running the business of Commission Agent of Sale and Purchase of Vegetables outside the limits of the Notified Market Area. Notice of motion was issued and in response thereto, it is pointed out by learned counsel for the respondents that an agreed order dated 26.8.2008 has been passed by this Court in CWP No. 5898 of 2007, in terms whereof the licence of the private respondents has been provisionally renewed till they are shifted to the new Vegetable Market which is already under construction. On a query, learned counsel for the Board submits that the on-going construction of the new Vegetable Market is likely to be completed by September, 2009. In view of the afore-stated stand taken by learned counsel for the respondents, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the provisional licences of the private respondents shall be renewed up to September, 2009 only and thereafter they shall shift immediately to the new Vegetable Market, if so permissible. In other words, the provisional licences of the private respondents shall not be renewed beyond September, 2009, without prior permission of this Court. Disposed of. February 18, 2009. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE