(1.) The petitioner was working as a Subedar in the Indian Army till 26th January, 2007 when he was given the honourary rank of a lieutenant. He was in the ordinary course to retire from military services on 30th April, 2005. He appears to have expressed his willingness to work for another two years in terms of the prevalent scheme which envisages such extended service provided he fulfill the criteria prescribed for such extension. He was upon consideration granted extension for a period of two years which was later withdrawn on the ground that the petitioner had suffered red ink entries in the year 1990 in the rank of a Naik. Aggrieved by the said withdrawal of extension, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition in which he has not only challenged the orders declining extension to him but also prayed for a mandamus directing the respondents to continue him in service upto 30th April, 2007.
(2.) The respondents have filed their counter affidavit in which they have tried to justify the refusal of extension to the petitioner. We are not however required to examine the merits of the contention urged on either side having regard to the fact that the petitioner has on the basis of an interim order passed by this Court on 30th June, 2006 continued in service till date. Ms. Barkha Babbar counsel appearing for the respondents submits that since the extended period which the petitioner claims in the petition has already expired, this writ petition has become infructuous and can be disposed of as such, particularly when she has instructions to state that the respondents would not seek recovery of the emoluments received by the petitioner during the period he has worked with the Army.
(3.) Mr. Trivedi, counsel appearing for the petitioner does not dispute that position. He submits that so long as the petitioner's service over the extended period is taken to his benefit for all intents and purposes, the petition could be disposed of as having been rendered infructuous.