Judgment :- M. Jaichandren, J. 1. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant had submitted that the Writ Appeal has become infructuous, in view of the fact that final orders had been passed, by the 2nd respondent, on 29.3.2013, imposing the punishment of compulsory retirement, on the appellant, with effect from 31.8.1998. 2. In view of the aforesaid submission made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, the writ appeal stands dismissed, as infructuous. However, it is made clear that it would be open to the appellant to challenge the order passed by the 2nd respondent, dated 29.3.2013, if so advised, before the appropriate forum/authority, in the manner known to law. No costs.