IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.M. No. 14662 of 2009 and CWP No. 12254 of 1996 (O&M) Date of Decision: 07.01.2010. Sham Lal Thaman and others ..Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ..Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKUL MUDGAL, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present : None for the petitioners. Mr. Amit Sethi, Advocate, for applicant-Municipal Council -respondent No.3. Mr. Rupinder Khosla, Addl. A.G. Punjab for respondents No.1 and 2. Mr. S.S.Brar, Advocate, for respondents No. 4 to 8. ***** MUKUL MUDGAL, C.J. (Oral) This is a writ petition of 1996 pending in this Court with the following prayers:- i) To issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to take action against respondent no.4 on the basis of enquiry report of Shri Preetam Singh Johal immediately so as to save loss to respondent No. 3. ii) To further issue a writ of mandamus directing respondents No. 1,2 and 3 to remove respondents No. 4 to 7 immediately under Section 16 of the CWP No. 12254 of 1996 [2] Act as they have grossly misused their position and caused heavy loss of money and property. iii) To issue a writ of mandamus cancelling all the transaction entered into by respondents no. 4 to 7 with regard to property mentioned in Annexures P-1 to P-3 and respondent No. 3 be directed to enter the property mentioned in Annexures P-1 to P-3 in the Municipal Records being the owner of the property. It is not in dispute that the terms of the Municipal Councillors against whom the allegations have been levelled by the petitioners, had come to an end long time ago. Learned counsel for the respondent-State of Punjab states that an FIR has been registered against the persons who had indulged in the illegal sale/transactions. In view of the above, the prayers made in the writ petition do not survive and the writ petition is disposed of as having become infructuous. Pending application is also disposed of. (Mukul Mudgal) Chief Justice (Jasbir Singh) 07.01.2010 Judge 'ravinder'