IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.2249 of 2025 Date of Decision: 13.10.2025 __________________________________________________________ Vanita Kumari …….Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and Others ….Respondents __________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Sat Prakash, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for State. __________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral): While placing on record communication dated 30.08.2025, issued under the signatures of Principal, GSSS, Chadhiar, District Kangra, H.P., learned Deputy Advocate General states that prayer made in the instant petition for regularisation has been allowed. He states that after her being regularised, petitioner has already joined at the School, detailed hereinabove. 2. While referring to the affidavit, copy whereof has also been annexed with the aforesaid communication, learned Deputy Advocate General further states that at the time of her being regularised, petitioner has undertaken to withdraw the case at hand. 3. Having perused aforesaid communication, coupled with the fact that services of the petitioner have been regularised, there appears to be no justification to keep the present petition alive and accordingly the 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 same is disposed of, as having rendered infructuous. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in the appropriate Court of law, qua the surviving grievance, if any. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge October 13, 2025 (Rajeev Raturi)