IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 23077 of 2010 Date of Decision: September 22, 2011 Sarjit Singh ….Petitioner Versus The State of Haryana and others. … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present: Mr. Amit Jain, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Deepak Girohtra, AAG, Haryana, for respondent Nos.1 to 4. Mr. Sudhir Aggarwal, Advocate, for respondent Nos. 5 and 6. 1. Whether reporters of local news papers may be allowed to see judgment? 2. To be referred to reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Alok Singh, J. (Oral) Mr. Sudhir Aggarwal, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 5 and 6 states that respondent Nos. 5 and 6 have purchased share of the petitioner vide sale deed dated 31.05.2011 and mutation has also been sanctioned pursuant to the said sale deed, therefore, present petition has been rendered infructuous. CWP No. 23077 of 2010 Learned counsel for the petitioner states that he has no instructions as on day. Present petition is dismissed for non- prosecution. If learned counsel for the petitioner receives any instruction contrary to the statement made by learned counsel for respondent Nos. 5 and 6, he shall be at liberty to move application for recalling of the order. September 22, 2011 ( Alok Singh ) vkd Judge 2