IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (S/B) No. 315 of 2008 Smt. Manju Kathait & others …Petitioners. Versus State of Uttarakhand & others …Respondents. Mr. Atul Bahuguna, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. P.C. Bisht, Advocate for respondent nos. 1 and 2. Mr. Sudhir Singh, Advocate for respondent nos. 4 and 5. Coram: Hon’ble J.S. Khehar, C.J. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. J.S. Khehar, C.J, (Oral) 1. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the instant writ petition has been rendered infructuous and the same be disposed of as having been rendered infructuous. 2. Learned counsel for the respondents states that they have no objection in the disposal of the instant writ petition in terms of the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioners. 3. In view of the above, the instant writ petition is disposed of as having been rendered infructuous. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) (J.S. Khehar, C.J.) 22.4.2010 Avneet