Aparesh Kumar Singh, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. Petitioner has challenged the Clause Nos. 9, 13 and 14 in the Notice Inviting Tender No. 01/2007 -08 issued by the Executive Engineer, Rural Engineering Organization Work Division Seraikella -Kharsawan published in the daily newspaper in the year 2007.
(2.) THE respondents have appeared and filed their counter -affidavit in which they have categorically stated in para -8 that earlier decision of the respondents have been recalled and a fresh order has been passed on 11.2.2008 by the Principal Secretary, Rural Engineering Organization, Ranchi. The respondents have henceforth decided to accept the bank guarantee as earnest/security money and the contractor has to deposit 5% as security deposit, which will be deducted from the running bills instead of 10%. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on the other hand, submitted that pursuant to the said decision itself the Notice Inviting Tenders, which are required to be published under the Public Works Department and Other Works Department are to be in terms of the provision of the Public Works Department Code.
(3.) FROM the aforesaid submissions, therefore, it appears that the grievance of the petitioner raised in the present writ petition has been redressed.;