IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP(T)No.12396 of 2008. Date of decision: 31.12.2010 Deep Ram …. Petitioner Versus State of H.P & ors. .... Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, J. Whether approved for reporting ? No For the petitioner: Mr.Neel Kamal Sood, Advocate. For the respondents: Sh.Ramesh Thakur, Deputy Advocate General. Deepak Gupta, J.(Oral) Sh.Neel Kamal Sood, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been regularized during the pendency of the petition and in case the petitioner has any grievance left, he shall make a representation in this behalf to the respondents and time bound directions be given to the respondents to dispose of the same. 2. In view of the aforesaid submission of Sh.Sood, the petition is disposed of as having 2 become infructuous. The petitioner has been regularized and the main relief claimed by him was granted to him. However, if the petitioner has any grievance with regard to date of grant of work charge status/regularization, he can file a representation to the respondent No.1 within eights weeks from today. In case the petitioner files such representation then the respondent No.1 shall decide the same in accordance with law. The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. No order as to costs. December 31, 2010 (m) ( Deepak Gupta ) Judge