JUDGMENT : Mansoor Ahmad Mir, C.J. (Oral) Mr.Romesh Verma, learned Additional Advocate General, stated that the case of the petitioners is covered by the judgment, dated 11th March, 2014, rendered by this Court in CWP No.1257 of 2009, titled Rajesh Kumar Khanna vs. State of H.P. & Ors., and connected matters and prayed that this petition may be disposed of in terms of the said judgment. He also filed across the Board a copy of the judgment supra, made part of the file. 2. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioners stated that the reliefs No.(i) to (iii) claimed by the petitioners through the instant writ petition are covered by the judgment supra, however, submitted that the writ petition survives viz. a viz. relief No.(iv). 3. Relief No.(iv) is reproduced hereunder: “Issue a writ of Mandamus or direction in the nature of writ of Mandamus directing the respondent No.1-4 to ensure that no truck registered with the respondent No.4 be permitted to operate in any other area or from any other club or society.” 4. It is a moot question whether such a prayer can be granted by this Court. 5. Without determining the said question, we deem it proper to dispose of the writ petition in terms of the judgment referred to supra, so far as reliefs No.(i) to (iii) are concerned. Ordered accordingly. The judgment supra shall form part of this order also. 6. Qua relief No.(iv), the petitioners are at liberty to approach the competent Authority by way of representation and the competent Authority is directed to make a decision thereon within a period of six weeks from the date of filing of the representation. 7. The writ petition as also the pending CMPs, if any, stand disposed of accordingly.