1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.856 OF 2010 Rahiman Peermohammad Shaikh, Convict No.4364, Open Jail, Paithan, District Aurangabad. .. Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr. K.U.More, Advocate (appointed) for petitioner Mr. D.R.Kale, A.P.P. for respondent-State CORAM : P.V. HARDAS AND A.V. POTDAR, JJ DATE : 8th OCTOBER 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER P.V.HARDAS, J.) 1. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2. A communication sent by the petitioner through jail came to be registered as Criminal Writ Petition. We had accordingly appointed Advocate Mr.K.U.More, as a Counsel to represent the petitioner in this petition before us. 2 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that his application seeking his release on furlough has not been decided and, therefore, prays for issuance of a writ directing the respondents to decide his application, in accordance with law. On notice of this petition being issued to the respondents, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, on instructions states that the application of the petitioner was decided on 6.10.2010. In that light of the matter, therefore, the reliefs which the petitioner has sought for in this petition have been rendered infructuous. 4. We accordingly dismiss this petition as infructuous. Rule stands discharged. We quantify the fees payable to the learned Counsel appointed on behalf of the petitioner at Rs.1,500/- (Rs.One thousand five hundred). ( A.V. POTDAR ) ( P.V.HARDAS ) JUDGE JUDGE (vvr/856.10criwp) 3