THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM W.P.No. 5633 of 2007 10-04-2007 Between:- Rolls-Royce Marine India Limited, A Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having its Registered Office at 103 Windsor, Kalina, Santacruz (East) Mumbai, 400 098, (Through its Managing Director, Gary Wieland) Petitioner And Union of India, Through Ministry of Shipping, New Delhi and three others. Respondents W.P.M.P.No. 8746 of 2007 Between: Rolls-Royce Marine India Limited, A Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having its Registered Office at 103 Windsor, Kalina, Santacruz (East) Mumbai, 400 098, (Through its Managing Director, Gary Wieland) Petitioner/Petitioner. And Union of India, Through Ministry of Shipping, New Delhi and three others. Respondents. W.P.M.P.No. 9230 of 2007 Between: M/s. Marine Jet Power AB, A company incorporated in Sweden, Having its principal office at Se 748 01 Osterbyburk, Sweden, Also through: M/s. Dynatron Services, 205/206, Pragati House, D-5, Defence Colony, New Delhi—110 024. Applicant/Respondent No.4 And Rolls-Royce Marine India Limited, A Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having its Registered Office at 103 Windsor, Kalina, Santacruz (East) Mumbai, 400 098, (Through its Managing Director, Gary Wieland) and three others. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM W.P.M.P.No. 8746 of 2007; W.P.M.P.No. 9230 of 2007 and W.P.No.5633 of 2007 Oral order: Sri L. Ravichander, learned counsel for the writ petitioner filed W.P.M.P.No. 8746 of 2007 for withdrawal of the writ petition. This application is resisted by the fourth respondent in the writ petition contending that in view of the interim orders passed by this Court on 20-03-2007, the withdrawal simpliciter of the writ petition would enable the second respondent to assume that the observations in the interim order of this Court dated 20-03-2007 subsist despite the dismissal of the writ petition as ‘withdrawn’. Learned counsel for the petitioner and the fourth respondent have endeavoured to make submissions as to the validity of the intimation addressed by the second respondent to these parties on 15-03-2007, (a) calling upon the petitioner to reduce the price quoted in the tender of the petitioner dated 23-12- 2006 and (b) calling upon the fourth respondent to submit a technical proposal for water jet equipment model No. MJP 750 as per tender specification and TNC, respectively. Since the writ petition is being dismissed as ‘withdrawn’, as requested on behalf of the petitioner, it is not necessary to assay an opinion on this contested position. Suffice it to record that with the dismissal of the writ petition as ‘withdrawn’ and not on merits, the interim order dated 20-03-2007 including all the observations thereat are comprehensively effaced and ab initio. This is the legal position and the dismissal of the writ petition as ‘withdrawn’ does not mark out a distinction to this established position. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed as ‘withdrawn’. Consequently, the interlocutory petitions – W.P.M.P.No. 8746 of 2007 and W.P.M.P.No.9230 of 2007 -- are also disposed of. No costs. ____________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J Dated:10-04-2007 Pvks/* Nb: Furnish c.c. in two days. B/o pvks/*