IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 1198 OF 2010 (S/S) Rajeev Kumar ……Petitioner. Versus State Bank of India and others. …Respondents. Present: Mr. Ajay Veer Pundir, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S.K. Jain, Advocate for the respondents. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. 1. Heard Mr. Ajay Veer Pundir, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. S.K. Jain, Advocate for the respondents. 2. The petitioner is presently working in the Indian Army. He had applied for the job in the State Bank of India. The petitioner had to submit before the Bank one essential certificate i.e. discharge certificate issued by a duly authorised authority of Army, on or before 30.11.2010. The petitioner has only prayed in the writ petition for a mandamus directing the Bank Authorities to decide the representation of the petitioner before the Bank, in which the petitioner has prayed that the time be extended to give the required certificate. This was the sole prayer of the petitioner in the writ petition. 3. Today, Sri S.K. Jain, Advocate representing the Bank has filed an order dated 28.12.2010, whereby the Bank Authorities themselves have extended the time upto 31.1.2011. The same is kept on record. 2 4. In view of the fact that the Bank itself has extended the time, there is no plausible reason to keep the writ petition pending. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed as having become infructuous. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 6.1.2011 Rathour