// 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2205/2004 Abrar Khan S/o Shri Muneer Beg and Others Versus The State of Rajasthan and Others Date of Order ::: 18.03.2008 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Jain Smt. Neetu Bhansali, Advocate, for Shri S.K. Jindal, Counsel for petitioners Shri R.K. Kala, Counsel for respondent No.2 and 3 #### By the Court:- Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioners have preferred the present writ petition with the following prayer:- “It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to accept and allow this writ petition and further be pleased to:- (i) issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof and thereby quash and set aside the impugned Tender notice dated 16/03/2004 (Annexure-5); (ii) issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof and thereby quash and set aside the order of giving the canteen on the lease to Respondent No.4; (iii) issue any other appropriate order or direction which the Hon'ble Court deems just and proper in favour of the petitioners and the cost of the writ petition be also awarded in favour of the petitioners;” // 2 // The learned counsel for the respondents No.2 and 3 has raised preliminary objection about maintainability of the writ petition. It is contended by him that this writ petition is mainly directed against the respondents No.2 and 3. The respondent No.2 - Jaipur Zila Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Limited, is not the State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India in view of the judgment of this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.631/1993 – Ajmer Zila Dairy Employees Union Vs. Registrar Rajasthan Cooperatives and Another, decided on 11th February, 1993, therefore, this writ petition is not maintainable. He further contended that the Tender notice dated 16.03.2004 (Annexure-5), impugned in this writ petition, was only for a period of three years and the said period of three years has now come to an end, therefore, the present writ petition has become infructuous. He also contended that the petitioner had an alternative remedy under the provision of Industrial Disputes Act through their Union and they have already approached the Conciliation Officer in respect of same relief, which has been prayed in the present writ petition, therefore, apart from merits of the case, the present writ petition is liable to be dismissed being not maintainable and as having become infructuous. The learned counsel for the petitioners has not controverted the above objections of the learned counsel for the respondents and contended that in view of these objections the writ petition may be dismissed. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties, I find force in the objections raised on behalf of the respondents No.2 and 3. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed being not maintainable and as having become infructuous, with no order as to costs. (Narendra Kumar Jain) J. //Jaiman// // 3 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Misc. Stay Application No.1957/2004 In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2205/2004 Abrar Khan S/o Shri Muneer Beg and Others Versus The State of Rajasthan and Others Date of Order ::: 18.03.2008 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Jain Smt. Neetu Bhansali, Advocate, for Shri S.K. Jindal, Counsel for petitioners Shri R.K. Kala, Counsel for respondent No.2 and 3 #### By the Court:- Consequent upon dismissal of the writ petition itself, the stay application, filed therewith, does not survive and the same is also dismissed. (Narendra Kumar Jain) J. //Jaiman//