IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 6719 of 2010 Date of decision: 03.12.2010 Rattan Chand … Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. … Respondents Coram : The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Ahuja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Rajiv Rai, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. J.S. Rana, Assistant Advocate General. V.K. Ahuja, J. (Oral): The petitioner has filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, claiming the following reliefs:- “(A) That the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue the writ of mandamus whereby the respondent may kindly be directed to transfer the petitioner from Modal Central Jail Nahan, to Open Air Jail Bilaspur forthwith. (B) That the respondent may kindly be directed to decide the mercy petition which was filed by the wife of the petitioner in January 2007 and the mercy petition filed by the petitioner himself on dated 28.7.2010 vide Annexure P-4 at earliest with speaking order. © That the respondents may kindly be restrained from charging Rs.110 per day from the prisoners of the Open Air Jail Bilaspur.” 1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2. In regard to the first relief (a), it has been stated in the reply filed by the State that the petitioner has already been transferred to Open Air Jail Bilaspur and as such, this relief cannot be granted to the petitioner since he has been transferred, as prayed for. 3. In regard to relief (b), in the reply filed by the State, it has been submitted that mercy petition filed by the petitioner and his wife will be considered by the State Sentence Review Board in its next meeting. It should be ensured by the learned Assistant Advocate General that the matter is put up before the said Board in its next meeting. 4. In regard to relief ©, it has been stated in the reply filed by the State that the matter is already sub-judice before this Court in CWPIL No. 8 of 2007 in the matter of Kapil Dev son of late Finu Ram and other convicts Vs. State of H.P. Once the matter is sub- judice, the petitioner is at liberty to file an application and get himself impleaded in the said petition to be heard accordingly. 5. In view of the above, nothing survives in the petition, the same is disposed of accordingly, so also the pending application(s), if any. ( V.K. Ahuja ), December 03, 2010 Judge (BSS) 3