Shrinath Cane Processing Pvt. Ltd., v. The Commissioner Of Sugar, And ORS

wp2936 ssp

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2936 OF 2011 Shrinath Cane Processing Pvt.Ltd. ...Petitioner vs.

The Commissioner of Sugar Maharashtra State, Pune and others

...Respondents

Mr.Tanaji Mhatungade i/b Mr.S.B.Deshmukh for the Petitioner Ms M.P.Thakur, AGP for the respondent Nos.1,3 and 4 Mr.Vijay Killedar for respondent No.2 CORAM : A.S.OKA, & REVATI MOHITE DERE, JJ.

DATE : JUNE 9, 2015 P.C.:

The learned counsel appearing for the second respondent on instructions states that in view of the pendency of Review Petition and this Petition, the second respondent is no longer interested in setting up a sugar factory at village Benwadi, Taluka Karjat, District Ahmednagar.

We accept the said statements.

These statements show that the second respondent does not desire to act upon the order dated 18th August 2010. Therefore, challenge to the said order does not survive. In view of this position, the other substantive challenge to the notification dated 3rd December 2011 has become academic and it is not necessary to decide the same on merits.

wp2936 In view of what is stated above, this petition does not survive and the same is disposed of. We, however, make it clear that all issues raised concerning the legality of the notification dated 3rd December 2011 are expressly kept open. At this stage, the learned counsel for the second respondent submits that the Chief Director of Sugar, Union of India be directed to cancel the Performance Guarantee submitted by the second respondent and return the same to the second respondent. As the Officer concerned is not a party to this petition, we grant liberty to the second respondent to make appropriate application for cancellation of the Performance Guarantee.

(REVATI MOHITE DERE,J.) (A.S.OKA,J.)