IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP(T) No.2774 of 2008 Date of decision: 16.6.2009 Laiq Ram …….Petitioner. Vs. State of H.P. and another ....….Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For the Petitioner : Mr. K.D. Shreedhar, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. A.K. Bansal, Additional Advocate General. Kuldip Singh, Judge(Oral) The Petitioner has filed OA No.2123 of 1995 before Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal which was abolished vide notification dated 8th July, 2008. Thereafter, the Original Application was transferred to this Court in view of the Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal (transfer of decided and pending cases and applications) Act, 2008 and was registered as CWP(T) No.2774 of 2008. 2. The petitioner in the petition has prayed the following reliefs:- (i) That the order dated 21.1.95 ( annexure A-6) passed by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests may be quashed and set aside. Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?Yes. 2 (ii) That the respondents may be directed not to give more than one post to Sr. Scale Stenographer in the Cadre of Superintendents Grade-I. (iii) That provisional seniority list circulated vide Memorandum dated 23.2.1994 (Annexure A-2) may be quashed and set aside and the respondents be directed not to make this seniority list a basis for promotion to the post of Superintendent Grade-I (iv) That the respondents may be directed to produce the entire record pertaining to the case for the perusal of this Hon’ble Tribunal. 3. The petitioner in his affidavit dated 17.9.1995 in support of the petition has given his age 57 years. In these circumstances as on today the petitioner stands retired from service. In the petition no relief has been prayed for consequential benefits. In view of the reliefs prayed in the petition no effective relief can be given to the petitioner even if petition is allowed. In these circumstance, no decision on merits is required just for academic interest. Thus keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has retired and no effective relief can be given to him in the petition in view of his prayer made in the petition, the petition has become infrustuous and is accordingly disposed of. ( Kuldip Singh ) Judge. June 16, 2009 (sks)