ORDER We had dealt with this matter at length and had passed the speaking order on 4-1-1996. It was at the fag end of the submissions that the learned counsel for the State of Himachal Pradesh had desired that we give him an opportunity to place the matter before, the State Government to enable it to make a positive response of the State Government in the matter of filling up the vacancies. There is no response to the same except that the counsel states that the State Government has no desire to fund this Institute because, according to her, it is no more authorised. We have set out earlier the facts leading to the making of the IAs and have also referred to the decision of this Court in Unni Krishnan case [Unni Krishnan, J.P. v. State of A.P. (1993) 1 SCC 645 ] as well as in the case of T. M. A. Pai Foundation [T. M. A. Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka, (1995) 5 SCC 220 ]. We had extracted the relevant paragraph from the decision of Unni Krishnan case [Unni Krishnan, J.P. v. State of A.P. (1993) 1 SCC 645 ] which clearly stated that any vacancies still remaining after the cut-off date can be filled by the management. In the instant case also, there have been vacancies which have remained unfilled after the cut-off date and it would, therefore, be open to the management to fill them up in the manner they consider appropriate. The SLP will stand disposed of in the light of and as per directions in Unni Krishnan case [Unni Krishnan, J.P. v. State of A.P. (1993) 1 SCC 645 ].