JUDGMENT : 1. Heard Mr. Indrajit Sinha, counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner along with Mr. Bibhash Sinha, Advocate. 2. Heard Mr. Abhay Prakash, counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No. 1. 3. Heard Mr. Rahul Saboo, counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No. 2. 4. This petition has been filed for the following relief: - “for issuance of an appropriate writ/writs, order/orders direction/direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing of the order as contained in Memo No. 1693 dated 24.05.2012 passed in purported exercise of the Section 20 of Micro Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as JHMSEFC) by the Chairman whereby and whereunder the complaint filed by the opposite parties/respondents has been allowed and direction has been issued to deposit an outstanding principal amount of Rs. 6,20,180.40/- and an interest three times on the aforesaid amount to the Bank rate and further an amount of Rs. 77,315/- relating to other items as stated in the application meaning thereby the entire claim of the claimant has been allowed i.e. without jurisdiction and also the order has been passed by single Member by the Chairman as only the Chairman cannot pass the order as the quorum has been defined under the regulation that only three Members including the Chairman can decide an issue and the claim thus the order passed by the Chairman, JHMSEFC. AND/OR (b) For issuance of appropriate writ/writs, direction/directions that during the pendency of the present writ application the order as contained in Memo No. 1693 dated 24.05.2012 be kept in abeyance. AND/OR (c) For issuance of such other writ/writs, order/orders and direction/directions as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 5. From the records of this case, it appears that vide order dated 16.05.2019, the Respondent No. 1 was directed to produce the original file in connection with Case No. JHSEFC-01/11, thereafter the records of the said case was produced before the Court and the Respondent No. 1 has filed the aforesaid counter affidavit. 6. From the records of this case, it appears that vide order dated 16.05.2019, the Respondent No. 1 was directed to produce the original file in connection with Case No. JHSEFC-01/11, thereafter the records of the said case was produced before the Court and the Respondent No. 1 has filed the aforesaid counter affidavit. 6. Counsel for the petitioner at the outset submits that Respondent No. 1 has filed a counter affidavit in this case and has made a specific statement in Para-11, wherein it has been stated that the allegation of the petitioner that the award was passed by Single Member is baseless and it has been further stated in the counter affidavit that the award is dated 27.04.2012 was passed by the quorum constituted for the purpose. He submits that the award which is mentioned in Para-11 has been filed along with the counter affidavit and is contained at Page-20 consisting the signatures of various members. He submits that in the present case, the petitioner had challenged the communication of the award which is contained in Memo No. 1693 dated 24.05.2012 and annexed as Annexure-4, as this was the only document which was supplied to the petitioner and this document was taken as the award and the writ petition was filed. The learned counsel submits that it appears that the award is another document which has been annexed along with the counter affidavit filed by the Respondent No. 1 in this case at its Page No. 20. The learned counsel further submits that the award which has been annexed to the counter affidavit, is required to be challenged by the petitioner in accordance with law and he does not want to press this writ petition. The learned counsel submits that by virtue of the earlier order dated 20.03.2013 passed by this Court, substantial amount has been deposited before the Learned Registrar General, High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi and the same amount may be returned to the petitioner. 7. The learned counsel submits that by virtue of the earlier order dated 20.03.2013 passed by this Court, substantial amount has been deposited before the Learned Registrar General, High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi and the same amount may be returned to the petitioner. 7. Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No. 2 has no serious objection to prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner and he is also not in a position to dispute the statement made by the Respondent No. 1 and referred to by the counsel for the petitioner regarding the award, which is contained at Page-20 of the counter affidavit and it is not in dispute that the said award is not under challenge in the present writ petition. 8. Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 also has no serious objection to the prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner. 9. In the facts and circumstances of this case and in view of the arguments advanced on behalf of the parties, the present writ petition is hereby dismissed as withdrawn. 10. It is further observed that in the present writ petition, the award contained at Page-20 of the counter affidavit filed by the Respondent No. 1, is not under challenge. It will be open to the parties to take recourse against the award which has been annexed at Page-20 to the counter affidavit as may be available to the respective parties under law and withdrawal of this case will not prejudice the case of either parties before the learned court below. So far as the amount which has been deposited before the Learned Registrar General, High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi by virtue of interim order dated 20.03.2013 is concerned, the said amount is directed to be refunded to the petitioner by issuance of a demand draft in favour of the petitioner. 11. Interim order passed earlier dated 04.04.2019 stands vacated. 12. Pending interlocutory applications, if any, are also dismissed as not pressed.