Judgment :- 1. W.P.No.29754 of 2006 filed by the petitioner was allowed by this Court on 03.09.2010 with the operative order reads as under: "(10.) Therefore, in my considered opinion, when the petitioner being 6 years senior to the third respondent, the respondents 1 and 2 erroneously prepared the impugned panel in G.O.Ms.No.1182, Home Department, dated 18.08.1997, which is a clear violation of Rule 4 of the General Rule. (11.) In this context, the observation of the Apex Court in the above mentioned judgment also squarely covers the case of the petitioner. Therefore, this Court, for the reasons stated above, allows the writ petition by directing the first respondent to prepare the inter-se seniority among the candidates, placing the petitioner above the third respondent in Category I of the Deputy Superintendent of Police and refix the seniority with all consequential benefits. No cost. 2. In view of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.29754 of 2006, this writ petition has been rendered infructuous. Dismissed as infructuous. No costs.