BINANI CEMENT LIMITED Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Matter has come up for orders on the application submitted by the learned Advocate-General on behalf of the respondent-State and the application submitted by the petitioner on April 7, 2011 seeking amendment to the writ petition. The writ petition has not been admitted so far. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) The writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking following prayers:

(3.) On behalf of the respondents, an application has been filed for vacation of interim order dated July 1, 2008 and for disposing of the writ petition as having become infructuous in view of the subsequent order passed by the respondents on April 29, 2011, by which the petitioner has been communicated that the decision with reference to his alleged review petition dated December 13, 2000. The order dated April 29, 2011 reads as follows: