Judgment K.S. Rathore, J.-Similar writ petition was filed before the Jodhpur High Court which was registered as SB Civil Writ Petition No. 6066/2005 titled as “Arjun Singh vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. The instant writ petition is preferred by Shri Dwarkesh Khanan Shramik Theka Sahakari Samiti Ltd. through its Secretary Shri Fateh Singh against the State more or less on the same ground. And the order dated 010.2005 granting lease in favour of the private respondents was also under challenge in the aforesaid writ petition and here in the instant writ petition the same order is under challenge. The only difference is that before the Jodhpur High Court, the writ petition was preferred by the individual Arjun Singh who is said to be founder member of the Dwarkesh Khanan Shramik Theka Sahakari Samiti Ltd. and here the Society through its Secretary preferred this writ petition. In the instant writ petition Shri Surendra Singh Rathore, State Minister for Irrigation, Government of Rajasthan is made party as Respondent No. 8. Similarly, before the Jodhpur High Court, he was also impleaded as private Respondent No. 8 and mala fide allegations are alleged against the Respondent No. 8 in the instant writ petition and the writ petition filed before the Jodhpur High Court. 2. The Jodhpur High Court vide its Judgment dated 09.01.2006 after dealing all the malafide allegations as well as legal objections which are also raised in the instant writ petition has dismissed the writ petition by giving detailed reasons. I am fully convinced with the submissions made on behalf of the respondents that the controversy involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the Judgment rendered by the Co-ordinate Bench of Jodhpur High Court. 3. Accordingly, I find no merit in the writ petition and the writ petition stands dismissed in view of the Judgment dated 09.01.2006 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6066/2005 and the Judgment dated 09.01.2006 be treated as part of this Judgment . Consequence thereof , the interim order granted by this Court dated 12.01.2006 also stands vacated.