Antony Dominic, J. The appellant filed the writ petition seeking to quash Ext.P4 stop memo and also for consequential reliefs. By the judgment under appeal, the learned single Judge disposed of the writ petition directing that final orders in pursuance of the stop memo shall be passed. It is this judgment, which is under challenge before us.
2. In the statement filed on behalf of the 2nd respondent, it is stated thus;
“Pursuant to the stop memo, the appellant/writ petitioner preferred a petition before the first respondent and on the basis of the same, the violation has been compounded on payment of Rs.25,000/- as fine and an amount of Rs.20,000/- towards royalty. On compounding of the offence, the stop memo has been withdrawn and the petitioner is permitted to conduct the metal crusher unit in conformity with the licensing conditions.”
W.A.No.1069/10 : 2 :
3. There is nothing before us to contradict the said averment in the statement filed. In such circumstances, we do not think that anything survives in the writ appeal to be adjudicated on merits.
Writ appeal is closed.
Rp //True Copy// PA to Judge Sd/-
ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE Sd/-
ANIL K. NARENDRAN JUDGE