IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL WRIT PETITION NO. 60 OF 2002 (SB) Rajendra Prasad Nautiyal ………….Petitioner. Versus Chief Engineer, Public Works Department (Level-I), Uttarkashi and others. ……….Respondents. Mr. D.S. Bisht, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for State of Uttarakhand/respondents. 30th October, 2009 Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. Heard Mr. D.S. Bisht, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, Advocate for petitioner and Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for State of Uttarakhand/respondents. In this case on 22.10.2009, the following order was passed: “Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for State of Uttarakhand. As per the averments of the counter affidavit, the petitioner is a Draft-man in Public Works Department of Uttarakhand. The writ petition has been filed by the petitioner against his order of termination and also for regularisation of his service. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, it has been stated that the petitioner has been granted ad-hoc appointment. On the basis of the averments made in the counter affidavit and the documents filed in the counter affidavit, the learned Standing Counsel states that cause of action no more survives in the present writ petition and the petition be dismissed as infructuous. 2 Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks one week’s time to get instructions in this matter. Time is granted. List this matter on 30th October, 2009 in first five cases of the daily cause list.” Today, Mr. D.S. Bisht, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, learned counsel for the petitioner has given a statement at the bar that the cause of action no more survives in the present writ petition and the matter has become infructuous. As the writ petition has become infructuous, the writ petition is being dismissed. Writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 30.10.2009 Rathour