Full Text
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 511/2008
Date of Decision: September 02, 2011 C.P.W.D. THR. ITS DIRECTOR GENERAL..... Petitioner
Through: Ms. Jasmine Ahmed, Advocate
….. Respondents
Through: Ms. Neelam Tiwari, Advocate for Mr. Varun Prasad, Advocate
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA
JUDGMENT
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? ANIL KUMAR, J. (ORAL)
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, states that the services of respondents have already been regularized. Counsel for the respondents, who is present in Court, also accepts that the services of the respondents have been regularized. 2011:DHC:4485-DB WP(C) No.511/2008
2. In view of the statement of learned counsel for the petitioner, the writ petition has become infructuous. The writ petition is therefore dismissed as having become infructuous. Parties are left to bear their own costs. ANIL KUMAR, J. SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA, J. SEPTEMBER 02, 2011 rd