IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. COPC (T) No. 220 of 2008. Decided on: 18th November, 2010. Parvesh Sharma. ….Petitioner. -Versus- J.S. Panwar and others. .…Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 __________________________________________________________ For the petitioner. : Mr. P.P. Chauhan, Advocate. For the respondents. : Mr. Vinod Thakur, Advocate. Respondents No. 3 and 4, are present in person. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral): In sequel to order dated 29.10.2010, respondents No. 3 and 4 are present in person. However, Mr. P.P. Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner, on the basis of instructions imparted to him by his client, prays for and is permitted to withdraw the present petition, with liberty reserved to the petitioner to avail appropriate remedy before appropriate Forum. 2. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Notices are discharged. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge 18th November, 2010. (bhupender) 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? - 2 - - 3 -