IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Stay Application No. 1180 of 2006 In Writ Petition No.140 of 2006 (S/S) Puran Singh Rawat, S/o Late Sri Satya Singh Rawat, Aged about 58 years, At present posted as Nayab Tehsildar, In the office of Rehabilitation Director, Tehri Dam Project Rishikesh, District- Tehri Garhwal. ……Petitioner Versus 1. State of Uttarakhand through Secretary, Revenue Department Dehradun, District-Dehradun. 2. Chief Revenue Commissioner, Uttaranchal Dehradun, District Dehradun. 3. Commissioner, Garhwal Division Pauri, District-Pauri Garhwal. 4. District-Magistrate Tehri Garhwal, District-Tehri Garhwal. 5. Anand Prakash Balodi, Revenue Inspector, District Pauri Garhwal. …….Respondents Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Subhash Upadhyay, Brief Holder for the State/respondents Dated:-04-08-2010 Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. Heard learned counsel of the parties and perused the record. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought the following relief’s:- 1. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned orders dated 27.01.2006 (Annexure-No.7) passed by the Commissioner Garhwal Mandal Pauri. 2. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing to the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioner for regular promotion on the post of Nayab Tehsildar. 3. Issue any suitable writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper on the basis of the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. Award the cost of the petition to the petitioner. Counter affidavit has been filed by respondent No.4, wherein, it is stated in para No. 2(d) that the petitioner had retired from service, the writ petition has rendered infructuous and deserves to be dismissed as such. It has also been stated in the 2 (a) of the counter affidavit that the petitioner was promoted by respondent No.5 purely on stop gap arrangement for a period of 89 days on the post of Naib Tehsildar, therefore, the petitioner could not consider on the post of Nayab Tehsildar. The petitioner retired from the service on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.11.2007. Since, the petitioner has retired, therefore, the writ petition has become infructuous. The writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. All pending applications stands disposed of. (B.S.Verma, J.) 04-08-2010 JM