IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No. 3048 of 2008. Decided on: 16th August, 2010. Duni Chand. …Petitioner. -Versus- Director General of Police and another. …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 __________________________________________________________ For the petitioner. : Ms. Archana Dutt, Advocate. For respondent No. 1. : Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General. None for respondent No. 2. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral): Mr. R.P. Singh, learned Assistant Advocate General has placed on record a copy of letter dated 3rd August, 2010. The operative portion of this letter reads thus: “The petitioner’s name figured above the name of respondent No. 2 in the final merit list and accordingly he was promoted as Head Constable on 12.09.1996, whereas the respondent No. 2 was promoted as such w.e.f. 25.09.1996. Therefore, the petition has become infructuous.” 2. Since the petitioner now stands promoted as Head Constable on 12.09.1996, the grievance of the petitioner stands redressed. Consequently, the present petition is rendered infructuous. Disposed of as infructuous. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge 16th August, 2010. (bhupender) 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?