IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWPOA No. 311 of 2019 Decided on: 20.03.2025 Bijan Singh and Ors. .…Petitioners. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Anr. …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners : Mr. Mukul Sood, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Baldev Singh Negi, Additional Advocate General. Satyen Vaidya, Judge (Oral) Instructions dated 17.03.2025 have been placed on record. A copy of the said instructions has been supplied to learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. After perusal of the contents of the instructions as also on the instructions of the petitioners, learned counsel for the petitioners 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 Neutral Citation No. ( 2022:HHC:16974 ) submits that the relief sought by the petitioners has already been granted to them and in this view of the matter, the petition has been rendered infructuous. 3. Consequently, the instant petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. 4. It is expected from the respondents that the actual benefits in terms of the decision taken by them shall be conferred upon the petitioners within a period of eight weeks from today. 5. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (Satyen Vaidya) 20th March, 2025 Judge (sushma)