CW – 2971/95 Sukh Deo Tripathi & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Judgment dt.13.3.09 1/2 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2971/1995 Sukh Deo Tripathi & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Date of Order : 13th March, 2009 PRESENT HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Mr. Amit Dave for Mr. P.P. Choudhary for the petitioner. Mr. I.S. Pareek ) for the respondents. Mr. Rajesh Joshi ) --------- 1. Learned counsel for the respondents have brought to the notice of this Court annex.7 advertisement notifying the vacancies for the post of Managers in the respondent Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. Bikaner has since been withdrawn by the said respondent Bank itself vide office order dated 31.8.1995 and, therefore, the challenge to the said advertisement Annex.P/7 dated 24.8.1995 has become infructuous. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner was also granted time by this Court on 11.11.2008 and 11.12.2008 to inform the Court as to whether the lis involved in the present writ petition still survives or not and if the petitioners have already been regularised as Manager with the respondent Bank the lis may not survive. However, no additional affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioners. 3. By the order dt.11.12.2008 the respondents were also directed to apprise this Court about the latest status of the petitioners CW – 2971/95 Sukh Deo Tripathi & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Judgment dt.13.3.09 2/2 and Managing Director and Executive Officer of the respondent Central Cooperative Bank, Bikaner were directed to appear before this Court on 16.1.2009. They appeared in this Court and have filed affidavit. Para 4 of the said affidavit which is common in both the affidavits is reproduced hereinunder:- “4. That by the present writ petition petitioners have claiming regularization and the petitioners are not employee of the answering respondent Bank, as such the previous administration has inadvertently not contested the said matter.” 4. Be that as it may since the impugned advertisement Annex.7 datd 24.8.1995 itself has been withdrawn by the respondent Bank as would be clear from the letter dated 12.8.1996 of the Dy. Registrar (Legal) in the Cooperative Department, Jodhpur addressed to their panel Advocate Shri Amrit Lal Dave, a photocopy of which is taken on record. 5. In the opinion of this Court, therefore, this writ petition has become infructuous. Accordingly this writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. No order as to costs. [ DR. VINEET KOTHARI ], J. item No.8 babulal/-