HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 1008 of 2009 (M/S) Ashok Kumar. … Petitioner. Versus Bharat Petroleum Co. Ltd. & two others. … Respondents Mr. Sharad Sharma, Senior Advocate assisted by Mrs. Indu Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner, Mr. J.C. Belwal, Advocate for respondent nos. 1 & 2, Mr. Shailendra S. Chauhan, Advocate for respondent no.3 Dated: September 8,2009: Hon’ble V.K. Bist, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no.3 to consider and grant the explosive licence as prayed for by respondent nos. 1 & 2 in their application; ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no.3 to grant explosive licence to the petitioner in pursuance to the judgments passed by the Hon’ble Court in earlier writ petitions; iii. Issue a writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case; iv. Award the cost of the petition. 3. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the State Govt. has already issued explosive licence in favour of the petitioner, therefore the writ petition has become infructuous so far the issuance of the explosive licence is concerned. However, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents are not releasing supply of the explosive items to the petitioner and the grievances of the petitioner yet not redressed in actual sense. 2 4. Mr. J.C. Belwal, learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 & 2 submitted that although the petitioner has been given explosive licence but so far releasing of the supply of explosive is concerned, there is no whisper in the writ petition for release of supply of explosives, therefore no such relief can be granted in favour of the petitioner. However he conceded that for the release of supply of explosives the petitioner may approach before the authority concerned. At this, the learned counsel for the petitioner prayed before the Court that the petitioner may be permitted to file fresh representation before the respondents for release of supply of the explosives within the stipulated period prescribed by the Court. 5. Since the counsel for respondent no.1 & 2 Mr. J.C. Belwal does not have any objection in case the petitioner files fresh representation before the authority concerned for release of explosives, the petitioner is permitted to file fresh representation before the authority concerned within a period of one week from today. In case such representation is filed within the period prescribed, the same shall be decided in accordance with law within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of representation. 6. With these directions, the writ petition is finally disposed of. No order as to costs. (V.K. Bist, J.) 08.09.2009 NCM: