8.5.2009 Present: Mr. D. Dadhwal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Adarsh Sharma, Advocate, for the respondents. CWP(T) No.4569/2008 Petitioner has assailed the impugned office order dated 29.8.1997 (Annexure A/2/1), whereby recovery of Rs.35,942/- is sought to be effected from the petitioner. Respondents in their reply have admitted that the said recovery was effected pursuant to the Award dated 31.12.1996 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mandi. On 6.5.2009, this Court passed the following order:- “According to Mr. Dushyant Dadwal, keeping in view the judgment delivered by this Court in FAO No.234/97 as also F.A.O. No.341/99 decided on 30th August, 2005, the action initiated by the respondents is untenable in law. Mr. Adarsh Sharma to obtain instructions.” Today, it is clarified by the learned counsel for the petitioner, that actual number of the appeals are FAO No. 234/97 & FAO No. 241/97 and not FAO No. 341/99 as was so stated on the previous hearing. According to the leraned counsel, it is undisputed that the petitioner in FAO No. 234/97 titled as HRTC v. Moti Lal and FAO No. 241/97, titled as Dayal Singh v. Moti Singh has been absolved of the liability fastened upon him. Learned counsel for the respondents fairly stated that in view of the stay order, recovery was not effected from the petitioner. In view of the subsequent developments which have taken place, the impugned order dated 29.8.1997 (Annexure A/2/1) is quashed. The petition stands disposed of. ( Sanjay Karol ), Judge. May 8, 2009 (rana)