1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on record the order dated 23.07.2012 and submitted that now in light of this order, the petitioner s grievance qua legality or otherwise of the orders impugned may not survive, as the petitioner would now not be in the business any more. However, the question of petitioner s spending money on account of the orders impugned could be subject matter of appropriate proceedings for recovery, if permissible under law, and therefore, at this stage, he is not pressing this petition with a view to take out appropriate remedy for recovery of the amount from the concerned and he submits that Court may observe that the rights and contentions of all the parties including the State are kept open and they would be available to be pressed into service, in case, if such remedy is availed.
3. Learned AGP Ms. Pathak submitted that there cannot be any objection to such a suggestion, as the Court has otherwise also kept all the contentions of the present respondents absolutely open, in case, if the present respondents are subjected to reproceedings, then it goes without saying that the rights and contentions to defend the action would always be remained open.
4. In light of the aforesaid submissions, this petition is disposed of as not pressed. Rule is discharged. Interim relief, if any, stands vacated. However, there shall be no order as to costs. The Court has clearly reserved liberty to both the sides to take up all the contentions in proceedings, that may ensue hereafter and Court has not examined or opined on merits of the matter.
(S.R.BRAHMBHATT, J.) Pankaj Page 3 of 3