IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 15780 of 2006 Date of Decision. August 31 ,2007. HUDA ......Petitioner(s) Versus Nirmal Chaudhary and others .....Respondent(s) Coram Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal * * * * Present Mr. S. P. Singh, Advocate for HUDA. Mr. KDS Hooda , Advocate for respondent no.1. Rajesh Bindal, J( Oral ) Learned counsel appearing for petitioner has placed on record a copy of memo No. 10610 dated 30.8.2007 addressed to the respondent no.1 conveying him the approval of Chief Administrative HUDA for allotment of plot No. 940 in Sector 12, Sonepat in lieu of plot No.1295-P, Sector 12, Sonepat subject to the decision of the State Commission. Copy of the letter has been given to the counsel for the respondent. In view of the development that respondent no.1 has been allotted a plot by the petitioner. It is submitted that the main writ petition itself can be disposed off as impugned order in the writ petition was passed by the District Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum, Sonepat, directing issuance of warrant against the official of HUDA for non CWP No. 15780 of 2006 -2- compliance of the order passed by the District Forum, which was upheld by the State Commission. Now since the order of District Forum dated 30.3.2005 stands complied with, learned counsel for the respondent no.1 does not have any objection in case the impugned orders, issuing warrants against officials of the petitioners and the rejection of the revision against that order, are set aside. Once the order of the District Forum, for non compliance of which warrants were issued against the officials of HUDA , has been complied with accepting the prayer in the petition, impugned orders Annexure P5 and Annexure P7 are quashed. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. August 31, 2007 ( Rajesh Bindal ) mamta Judge