IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 868 of 2006 with CWPs No. 956, 1142, 1275 of 2006 and CWP No. 25 of 2007. Judgment reserved on: May 15, 2007. Date of Decision: September 10, 2007. [ For title: see reverse ] Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Gupta, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Ahuja , Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: | | Please see reverse. For the Respondents: | V.K. Gupta, C. J. (Oral): In view of the judgment rendered in CWP No. 1113 of 2006 [Arya Pratinidhi Sabha through its Manager and another vs. State of H.P. and another] on September 10, 2007, all the above Writ Petitions shall stand disposed of. CMP No. 1384 of 2006 in CWP No. 868 of 2006 CMPs No. 1796 & 1797 of 2006 in CWP No.1142 of 2006. CMPs No.1991, 1992 of 2006 & 337 of 2007 in CWP No. 1275 of 2006 CMP No.40 of 2007 in CWP No. 25 of 2007. In view of the order passed in the main matters, all these applications are dismissed as having become infructuous. ( V.K. Gupta ), C.J. September 10, 2007. ( V.K. Ahuja ), J. (rks) 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? (i) CWP No. 868 of 2006. Arya Pratinidhi Sabha and another …..Petitioners. Versus H.P. Board of School Education …Respondent. For the petitioners: Mr. Surinder Sharma, Advocate. For the respondent: Mr. Lovnesh Kanwar, Advocate. (ii) CWP No. 956 of 2006. Shri Sanathan Dharam Sabha and others …….Petitioners. Versus H.P. Board of School Education ……Respondent. For the petitioner: Mr. K.D. Sood, Advocate. For the respondent: Mr. Lovnesh Kanwar, Advocate (iii) CWP No. 1142 of 2006. Shri Sanathan Dharam Sabha and others …….Petitioners. Versus H.P. Board of School Education ……Respondent. For the petitioner: Mr. K.D. Sood, Advocate. For the respondent: Mr. M.S. Chandel, Advocate General with Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy. Advocate General, for respondent No.1. Mr. Lovneesh Kanwar, Advocate, for respondent No.2. (iv) CWP No. 1275 of 2006 Tilak Raj and others …….Petitioners. Versus State of H.P. and another ….Respondents. For the petitioners: Mr. Subhash Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. M.S. Chandel, Advocate General with Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy. Advocate General, for respondent No.1. Mr. Lovneesh Kanwar, Advocate, for respondent No.2. (v) CWP No. 25 of 2007 Shiksha Jyoti, Shiksha Sabha and another Petitioners. Versus State of H.P. and another ….Respondents. For the petitioners: Mr. K.S. Banyal, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. M.S. Chandel, Advocate General with Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy. Advocate General, for respondent No.1. Mr. Lovneesh Kanwar, Advocate, for respondent No.2.