IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Special Appeal No. 75 of 2008 Bhupal Singh Jeena ……………Appellant. Versus The State Of Uttaranchal and others. ….Respondents. Mr. A.D. Tripathi, Advocate for the revision petitioner. Mr. H.M. Raturi, Advocate for the respondent. Coram : Hon’ble J.S. Khehar, C.J. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia,J. J.S. Khehar, C.J, ( Oral) 1. Learned counsel for the appellant states that the appropriate remedy in the facts and circumstances of the order passed by the learned Single Judge on 29.4.2008 while disposing of Writ Petition (S/B) No. 1398 of 2002 was to file a Review Petition. We are also satisfied that the instant submission advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant is fully justified. 2. In view of the above, learned counsel for the appellant states that he may be permitted to withdraw the instant Special Appeal with liberty to file a Review Petition. 3. Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as aforementioned . 4. Needless to mention that the appellant shall be at liberty to seek condonation of delay based on the period spent by him in pursuing the instant Special Appeal. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) (J.S. Khehar, C.J.) 19.05.2010 Rathour