- (1.) The matter was called out in the revised list. No one appears on behalf of the appellant on both the calls. Learned counsel for the respondents is present. We have gone through the records. The order against which this Letters Patent Appeal has been filed is dated 2nd September, 2009 and it is reproduced below in its entirety: "This civil miscellaneous petition has been filed for review of order dated 26.6.2007 passed in W.P.(C) No. 5229 of 2002 which reads as follows: "Mr. Anjani Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner, seeks permission to withdraw this writ petition, saying that it has become infructuous in view of the judgment dated 12th January, 2007, given by the Supreme Court in Transferred Case (Civil) No. 100 of 2002 (Mukund Swarup Mishra V/s. Union of India & ors.). Counsel appearing for respondent nos. 1,2,5 and 6 have no objection. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed, as withdrawn" It is submitted by Mr. Verma appearing for the petitioner that all the prayers in the writ petition did not become infructuous, and therefore, the writ petition was withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to approach the concerned authorities for consideration of petitioner's grievance for allotment of the petrol pump, but such liberty was not recorded in the said order and, and therefore, this civil miscellaneous petition has been filed for review of the order. The said order was passed in Court in presence of Mr. Verma. From the order it does not appear that any such liberty was prayed or given. Accordingly, this civil miscellaneous petition is dismissed. However, no costs." view of the observations in the impugned order, this appeal is devoid of merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.;