338 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP-13531-2002 (O&M) Date of Decision: 05.09.2025 Surinder Kumar Sharma ...Petitioner Versus Union of India and Others ...Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present:- Mr. Arvind Kumar Bangar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Dinesh Ghai, Advocate and Ms. Amita Arora, Advocate for respondent No.4. **** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL) 1. The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is assailing promotion of respondent No.4. 2. Mr. Dinesh Ghai, Advocate submits that respondent No.4 has already retired, thus, instant petition has rendered infructuous. 3. In view of the statement of Mr. Dinesh Ghai, Advocate, the petition stands disposed of as having been rendered infructuous. 4. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE 05.09.2025 Prince Chawla Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No PRINCE CHAWLA 2025.09.05 17:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document