IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL WRIT PETITION NO. 6763 OF 2001 (SS) Hari Lal Shah ……Petitioner. Versus State of U.P. and others. …Respondents. Mr. Vipul Painuly, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for State of Uttarakhand. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. Heard Mr. Vipul Painuly, Advocate for petitioner and Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for State of Uttarakhand. This writ petition was filed by the petitioner in the year, 1999 challenging the order dated 2.6.1999 passed by the respondent no. 2, according to which the earlier order of transfer dated 11.5.1999 was amended. The petitioner was transferred from Irrigation Department Lansdowne to Srinagar in district Pauri Garhwal, on his personal request. Consequent to the impugned order, the petitioner has been called back to Lansdowne. It is this order, which the petitioner has challenged before this Court. In short, the petitioner had challenged the order of his transfer by which he has been transferred from Srinagar to Lansdowne. When the petition was filed in the year, 1999, the Court had granted an ad interim stay order to the petitioner on 7.7.1999. According to the counsel for the petitioner Sri Vipul Painuly on the basis of the interim order dated 7.7.1999 passed in this writ petition, the petitioner is presently working in Srinagar. 2 No counter affidavit has been filed in this case by the State Government. However, more than ten years have already elapsed since the writ petition is pending before this Court. The matter which is agitated in the writ petition i.e. transfer of the petitioner has become infructuous by efflux of time. The writ petition is, therefore, liable to be dismissed as having become infructuous. Counsel for the petitioner further states that the petitioner has been allocated the State of Uttarakhand and is working in irrigation department at Srinagar. Learned Standing Counsel Sri N.P. Sah, who is representing the State Government in this case undertakes to inform the Secretary as well as the Director, Irrigation about the position of this case. The State Government will pass consequential orders. With the aforesaid observations, writ petition is dismissed. Interim order dated 7.7.1999 stands vacated. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 12.10.2009 Rathour