IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No.: 9378 of 2008. Decided on: 13.05.2011. _________________________________________________ Dr. S.D. Kashyap. … Petitioner. Versus Dr. Y.S. Parmar University and another. … Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Petitioner : Ms. Ranjana Parmar, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Onkar Jairath, Advocate. Rajiv Sharma, Judge (oral). Petitioner was allotted accommodation by the respondent-University. The case of the respondents, in a nutshell is that the petitioner has over stayed in the said accommodation. The petitioner had obtained the stay firstly from the civil Court. Thereafter the petitioner approached the erstwhile learned Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal. The learned Tribunal was pleased to grant the interim relief in 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. - 2 - favour of the petitioner. The original application, according to Mr. Onkar Jairath, learned counsel for the respondents, was withdrawn as the same had become infructuous. The review filed against the said order was also dismissed. In other words, the matter has not finally been adjudicated. It is settled law that on vacation of the interim stay, the respondent is liable to be compensated on the principle of restitution. It has also been submitted by Mr. Onkar Jairath, learned counsel for the respondents on the basis of instructions imparted to him by Mr. Tulsi Ram that recovery of a sum of ` 33,089/- has already been effected from the petitioner. 2. Consequently, in view of the observations and discussion made hereinabove, there is no merit in this petition and the same is dismissed, so also the pending application(s), if any. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge. May 13, 2011. (sck).