L.P.A.No.497 of 2011(O&M) 1 In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh … L.P.A.No.497 of 2011(O&M) Date of decision: 3.11.2011 Ajit Kumar Rana ..Appellant Versus Union of India and others ..Respondents Coram: Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Narain Raina Present: Mr. Sanjeev Bansal, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. H.S.Hooda, Advocate General Haryana with Ms. Palika Monga, DAG,Haryana for respondent No.2 Mr. V.S.Bhardwaj, Advocate for respondent No.3. Kanwar Ashwani Kumar, Advocate for respondent No.4 .. 1. To be referred to the reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest? M.M.Kumar,Acg.CJ. 1. The instant appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent is directed against the judgment dated 23.11.2010 rendered by the learned Single Judge repelling the challenge for removal of respondent No.5 on the post of Chairman, Haryana State Pollution Control Board. The issues raised before the learned Single Judge were;(A) Whether the respondent No.5 fulfilled the conditions of eligibility as envisaged by the provisions of Section 4(2)(a) of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution)Act, 1974 and Section 5(2)(a) of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, (B) Whether he is within the settled parameters laid down for the maximum age for appointment to the post of Chairman of the Board and (C ) no process of selection was carried by considering the competing claim of others. Learned Single Judge has opined against the appellant. L.P.A.No.497 of 2011(O&M) 2 2. However, the aforesaid issues have lost significance in view of the fact, Mr. H.S.Hooda, learned Advocate General, Haryana as well as Mr. V.S. Bhardwaj, learned counsel for Haryana State Pollution Control Board after obtaining the instructions from Shri O.P. Mann, Secretary, Haryana State Pollution Control Board have stated that the present tenure of the Chairman Haryana State Pollution Control Board-respondent no.5 would be expiring on 20.11.2011 and the same shall not be extended. 3. In view of the aforesaid, the judgment of the learned Single Judge has to be disregarded. The appeal is rendered infructuous and the same is disposed of as such. (M.M.KUMAR) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE November 3,2011 (RAJIV NARAIN RAINA) nk JUDGE