IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL WRIT PETITION NO. 149 OF 2005 (SS) Raghuveer ……Petitioner. Versus State of Uttaranchal and others. ..Respondents. Mr. Jagdish S. Bisht, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for State of Uttarakhand/respondent no. 1 and 2. None appears for respondents no. 3 and 4. 12th November, 2009 Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. Heard Mr. Jagdish S. Bisht, Advocate for petitioner and Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for State of Uttarakhand/respondent no. 1 and 2. Petitioner’s case was that he was liable to be reached at the age of superannuation at the age of 60 years, whereas the respondents was retiring him at the age of 58 years, hence, the present writ petition. The petitioner had obtained an interim order dated 17.02.2005 from this Court and in pursuance of that interim order, the petitioner was continuing in service. Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that in other cases, where similarly situated persons had challenged the orders retiring them at the age of 58, such orders were quashed and the petitioners were directed to remain in service upto 60 years. In the present case, during the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner has already reached age of 60 years and has subsequently retired from the service. On the last occasion, a statement was also made at the bar by Mr. Gopal Narain, learned counsel for the 2 respondent no. 3 and 4 that the petitioner has since reached the age of superannuation i.e. 60 years and has since retired. The writ petition has become infructuous. Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Jagdish Bisht has also stated the same fact before this Court. As the writ petition has become infructuous, the same is dismissed as such. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 12.11.2009 Rathour