AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
6 paragraphs · 213 wordsNamit Kumar, J
The petitioners have filed the present petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the cases of the petitioners for promotion to the post of Superintendent Grade I as per Class II Service Rules of 1978, a writ of certiorari for quashing notification dated 02.07.2001 whereby only favour respondents No.3 to 6, who are matriculates, the qualification prescribed under 1978 Rules are being lowered/diluted, and a writ of prohibition restraining respondents No.1 and 2 to fill up two posts of Superintendent Grade I from amongst respondents No.3 to 6.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that during pendency of the present petition, petitioner No.1 and respondents No.3 to 6 have already retired from service way back in the year 2008 and 2009 and petitioner No.2 has retired in 2017 and further, the petitioners have already been promoted to the post of Superintendent Grade-I. He further submits that unfortunately petitioner No.1 has died.
A perusal of the file shows that the relief claimed in the present petition has been rendered infructuous.
Therefore, the present petition is disposed of as having been rendered infructuous.
Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.