JUDGMENT Counsel for the contesting respondent nos.2 & 3 submitted that this writ petition has been rendered infructuous, in view of the order passed by the Supreme Court, directing the Sub-Ordinate Judge to hear the matter on merit and also directing the petitioner not to raise the question of jurisdiction. Counsel for the petitioner as also the counsel for the contesting respondent no.2 & 3 submitted that in so far as the principal question regarding framing of Rules and application of Wilkinson’s Rules, which was dealt with by the Full Court in its decision reported in 2000(1) PLJR 692 delivered in the matter of Mora Ho Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. is a subject-matter of appeal before the Supreme Court which is pending and the said appeal will finally determine as to whether the Wilkinson’s Rules will apply or the Rules have to be framed by the State superceding the Wilkinson’s Rules in regard to its application in the Kolhan area. In fact, in view of the aforesaid position, there was no need for the petitioner to file a writ petition in this Court, but it was informed that neither the petitioner, nor the counsel was aware of the appeal pending before the Supreme Court, due to which this writ petition had been filed. Consequently, in so far as the interim order is concerned, the same has been rendered infructuous but the remaining portion with regard to the dispute of application of the Wilkinson’s Rules or framing of Rules for application in the Kolhan area should be treated dismissed as withdrawn since the judgment to be finally rendered by the Supreme Court on the controversy obviously will govern the position.