Judgment : PinakiChandra Ghose, ACJ. 1. This writ appeal is directed against the order dt.9.6.2011 passed by the Hon’ble Single Judge in W.P. No.6925 of 2009. 2. The writ petition was filed by the respondent herein questioning the order of the appellant – Indian Oil Corporation bearing No.VR/494, dt.24.3.2009 by which the Corporation levied penalty of Rs.1,00,000/- on the respondent - writ petitioner and suspended sales and supplies of all product for 30 days from 24.3.2009 to 23.4.2009 to the writ petitioner on the ground of selling Off-Spec lubricants by it. 3. It appears to us that under the Guidelines of the appellant – Corporation, if it is found that any dealer is selling the lubricants which are not in accordance with the specification, penal action has been provided for such irregularities/malpractice at the retail outlets of the said Corporation. 4. At the time of hearing, the Hon’ble Single Judge found that the writ petitioner has already paid the penalty part and more than two years elapsed since the date of the impugned order. His Lordship therefore disposed of the writ petition by permitting the appellant - respondent-Corporation to retain the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- deposited by the respondent - writ petitioner in terms of the interim order of this Court directing it not to give effect to the order of suspension of sales, as directed in the impugned order in the writ petition. Being aggrieved, this appeal has been filed by the Corporation. 5. It appears that the effect of the order passed by the Hon’ble Single Judge has already given effect to by the parties. The amount of Rs.1,00,000/- has already been realized in terms of the order passed by the Hon’ble Single Judge on 9.6.2011. Thereafter, it appears that the writ petitioner has been carrying on its business and the appellant has not complained any fault or malpractice on the part of the writ petitioner. The impugned order was passed by the Hon’ble Single Judge on consideration of the fact that the writ petitioner has already paid the penalty part and more than two years elapsed since the date of the impugned order till the date of disposal of the writ petition and to balance the interest of both the parties. In the circumstances, in our opinion, it would be proper for us not to interfere with the order passed by the Hon’ble Single Judge. 6. In the circumstances, in our opinion, it would be proper for us not to interfere with the order passed by the Hon’ble Single Judge. 6. The order passed in this matter cannot be treated as precedence over any other matter. 7. We issue caution to the respondent – writ petitioner in the matter and we make it clear that in future if any type of malpractice is detected against the writ petitioner by the appellant – Corporation, it shall take necessary steps in the matter. 8. The writ appeal stands disposed of on the above terms. No costs.