Judgment These appeals have been preferred by the appellant-Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Dhanbad, against the order dated 24.1.2002 passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C.No.2622 of 2000(R) and C.W.J.C.No.2770 of 2000(R) by which the learned Single Judge had been pleased to allow the writ petitions partly, setting aside the impugned orders of the respondent-appellant herein Agricultural Produce Market Committee enhancing rent of the shops in occupation of the petitioners. Consequently, the demand notice issued by the respondent-appellant for recovery of arrears of rent was also set aside. Besides this, the learned Single Judge further directed the respondent-appellant herein i.e. the Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Dhanbad, to take a fresh decision in the matter of enhancement of rent of the shop premises in question after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. This order was passed relying upon the judgment rendered by this Court in the case of “M/s Jagdish Singh & Ors. Vrs. Bihar State Agricultural Marketing Board”, reported in 2001(2) J.L.J.R. 197 . It is now informed by the Counsel for the appellant-Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Dhanbad, that the judgment and order relied upon by the learned Single Judge had subsequently been set aside by the Division Bench, vide judgment and order dated 11.02.2002 in L.P.A.No.590 of 2001. Thereafter similarly situated respondents who were traders filed Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court giving rise to Civil Appeal No.3972-3974 of 2004 (M/s Jagdish Singh & Sons & Others Vrs. Agricultural Produce Market Committee & Others) wherein the question was exactly identical as to whether the Agricultural Produce Market Committee could enhance the rent and also claim arrears towards enhanced rate. It appears that the learned Judges of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, vide order dated 13.12.2004, had been pleased to pass an interim direction in the appeal to the effect that the recovery at the enhanced rates in terms of resolution dated 17.07.1999 for the period prior to 01.08.1999 shall remain stayed but with effect from 01.08.1999, the appellants shall make the payment month to month at the enhanced rate as per resolution and arrears, if any, shall be paid within a period of two months. It was further directed that if the appellants are unable to clear the arrears, they shall be liable to be evicted. It was further directed that if the appellants are unable to clear the arrears, they shall be liable to be evicted. In view of the interim direction issued by the Supreme Court in the case of similarly situated persons who are on identical footing with that of the respondents herein, we see no reason to entertain this appeal. Hence this appeal is disposed of with an observation that the fate of the appellant and respondents shall be governed by the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.3972-3974 of 2004 and until the appeal is finally decided, the interim order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court obviously shall be effective upon the case of the respondents herein also. It goes without saying that if the appeal of the traders/shop owners before the Supreme Court herein, who are on identical footing with that of the respondents herein, is finally allowed, the same obviously shall be effective in this appeal also. Hence, by way of abundant caution and to avoid further complication, we accept the request of the respondents by reiterating that if the appeal of the traders like the respondents herein are allowed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the order passed in the appeal obviously will ensure benefit to the respondents herein also. Accordingly, this appeal is disposed of.