IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No. 212 of 2010. Date of decision: 9.3.2011 Bishop Cotton School & Anr. …Petitioners. Versus Ravi Sawlani …Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Deepak Gupta, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioners: Mr. K.D. Sood, Advocate. For the respondent: Mr. Sunil Mohan Goel, Advocate. Deepak Gupta, J. (Oral) 1. Mr. Sunil Mohan Goel, learned counsel for the respondent states that he has received instructions from his client to state that his client shall not be pressing the relief that his client be re-instated in the service and shall limit his claim to challenging the validity of the termination of his service and claim for damages. 2. In view of this statement made by Mr. Sunil Mohan Goel, it is not necessary to decide the issue which the petitioner wants to be framed as a 1 Whether the reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes. 2 preliminary issue. Therefore, the petition has become infructuous. Disposed of accordingly. 9th March, 2011 (Deepak Gupta) (Krn Guleria) Judge