IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (S/B) No. 29 of 2005 Sagar Chandra …Petitioner. Versus State of Uttaranchal and others …Respondents. Mr. Sunil Upadhyay, Advocate for Mr. B.D. Upadhyay, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. H.M. Raturi, Advocate for respondent nos. 1 and 2. Coram: Hon’ble J.S. Khehar, C.J. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. J.S. Khehar, C.J, (Oral) 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that after the petitioner’s promotion to the rank of Chief Engineer, the instant writ petition has been rendered infructuous. 2. Learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1 and 2 acknowledges the factual position asserted at the hands of the learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. In view of above, the instant writ petition is disposed of as having been rendered infructuous. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) (J.S. Khehar, C.J.) 6.4.2010 Avneet