IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Modification Application No. 397 of 2011 IN Writ Petition No. 287 of 2005 (S/B) Umesh Kumar Pahwa ….…… Petitioner Versus Board of Directors & another ………. Respondents None for the petitioner. Mr. Lalit Belwal, Advocate for the applicant/respondents. Hon’ble Barin Ghosh, C.J. Hon’ble Servesh Kumar Gupta, J. In this application, it is being contended that Regulations of 2010 govern the subject at present and, accordingly, the liberty, as was granted by the order dated 11th May, 2011, be exercised in accordance with the Regulations of 2010. The order was passed on 11th May, 2011. There is no just reason, why on 11th May, 2011, the Regulations of 2010 could not be brought to the notice of the Court. It goes without saying that the Court has already granted liberty to deal with the matter and, while doing so, directed that the same be exercised in accordance with the Regulations of 2001, inasmuch as, the Court noticed that despite Regulations of 2001 was already in force and the Regulations of 1983 was specifically repealed, the disciplinary authority purported to exercise power under the repealed regulation. In the event, Regulations of 2001 have been replaced by other Regulations, it goes without saying that the liberty already granted can only be exercised under the Regulations, which are in force and not under the regulations which have been replaced. 2. The application is, accordingly, disposed of. (Servesh Kumar Gupta, J.) (Barin Ghosh, C.J.) 14.06.2011 14.06.2011 Aswal