IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (PIL) No. 113 of 2009 S.S. Bhandari …Petitioner. Versus State of Uttarakhand and others. …Respondents. None for the petitioner. Mr. H.M. Raturi, Advocate for respondent nos. 2 and 4. Mr. D.S. Patni, Advocate for respondent no. 5. Mr. Ravi Babulkar, Advocate for respondent no. 6. Coram: Hon’ble J.S. Khehar, C.J. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. J.S. Khehar, C.J, (Oral) 1. In furtherance of the directions issued by this Court on 10.2.2006, respondent no. 6 was to file a fresh counter affidavit. A fresh counter affidavit has accordingly been filed on behalf of respondent no. 6. The same is taken on record subject to all just exceptions. 2. Learned counsel for respondent no. 6, having invited our attention to the aforesaid affidavit, states that no sewer water whatsoever flows into the Saraswati Nala. He further states that Saraswati Nala has been covered by an iron net within the entire municipal limits of Rishikesh wherever it is open, the remaining part of the Nala having been covered by concrete slabs. As such, it is submitted that no garbage or affluent is flowing into Saraswati Nala after the remedial measures have been taken by respondent no. 6. 3. In view of the statement made by the learned counsel representing respondent no. 6 and having examined the photographs appended to the affidavit as Annexure-2 collectively, we are of the view that the 2 instant writ petition should be disposed of in view of the affidavit filed by respondent no. 6. 4. The instant writ petition is accordingly disposed of. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) (J.S. Khehar, C.J.) 14.6.2010 Rathour