IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (S/B) No.367 of 2004 Ashok Kumar Singh ……Petitioner. Versus State of Uttaranchal and others. …Respondents. Mr. B.S. Negi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.H.M. Raturi, Advcoate for respondent nos. 1 to 4. Coram: Hon’ble J.S. Khehar, C.J. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. J.S. Khehar, C.J, (Oral) 1. Learned counsel for the respondents has invited our attention to the main prayer made in the instant Writ Petition, namely, the claim of seniority at the hands of the petitioner, while he was working in the cadre of Lecturers. It is submitted that the instant Writ Petition has been rendered infructuous on account of the fact, that the petitioner has already retired on attaining the age of superannuation in the year, 2009. It is further submitted that the consequential claim of promotion cannot be asserted at the hands of the petitioners in the instant Writ Petition, inasmuch as, persons over whom the petitioner has allegedly claimed promotion have not been impleaded as party respondents. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, after applying his mind to the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the respondents, acknowledges that the Writ Petition has been rendered infructuous and may, therefore, be disposed of as such. 3. In view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the instant Writ Petition is disposed of as having been rendered infructuous. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) (J.S. Khehar, C.J.) 17.5.2010 Rathour