CWP No.382/2004. 27.04.2007 Present: Mr. M.S. Kanwar, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. V.D. Khidta, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mr. Lalit Sehgal, Advocate vice counsel for the respondent No.2. Mr. Kanwar submits at the bar that due to subsequent developments, the writ petition has become infructuous. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed having become infructuous with no order as to costs. The interim orders are vacated. Mr. Kanwar submits that though the writ petition has been disposed of having become infructuous, but his client has made representation to the authorities concerned for the redressal of his grievance. The respondents are directed to consider the representation made by the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of three weeks from today. Needless to say that the decision taken thereon will be a speaking order. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge April 27, 2007. (sck).