IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (S/B) No. 418 of 2004 Dr. Prachi Joshi …Petitioner. Versus State of Uttaranchal and others. …Respondents. Ms. Joyce Erwin, Advocate for Mr. D.S. Patni, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. P.C. Bisht, Advocate for respondent nos. 1 and 4. Mr. B.D. Kandpal, Advocate for respondent no. 2. Coram: Hon’ble J.S. Khehar, C.J. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. J.S. Khehar, C.J, (Oral) Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the instant writ petition has been rendered infructuous on account of the fact that the petitioner has since been granted employment. In view of the above, the instant writ petition is disposed of as having been rendered infructuous. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) (J.S. Khehar, C.J.) 31.3.2010 Rathour