IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 6543 of 1986 (O&M) Balaur Singh ...Petitioner vs State of Punjab and another ..Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: None for the petitioner. Mr. Yatinder Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Rajesh Bindal, J. Learned counsel for the State submitted that the additional affidavit was filed by the State in the present writ petition stating therein that all the benefits which are sought to be claimed by the petitioner in the present writ petition has been granted to him after the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Amarjit Singh's case, as has been referred to in the affidavit. He has handed over one additional copy of the affidavit, as the same was not available with the paper book. As the stand of the State is that the entire benefits as have been claimed in the writ petition have already been paid to him, the writ petition will not survive. However, as learned counsel for the petitioner is not available, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. 29.3.2011 (Rajesh Bindal) vs Judge