JUDGMENT : AJAY MOHAN GOEL, J. 1. The petitioner approached the learned erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal by way of O.A. No. 2435 of 2015, seeking following reliefs: “That the respondents may kindly be directed to produce the OMR/answer sheet of the applicant before this Hon’ble Court and to show the same to the applicant and further if some questions have wrongly been answered by the respondents, the same may very kindly be ordered to be sent to some expert so that justice is done to the applicant in the interest of justice.” 2. Post abolition of the learned Tribunal the matter was transferred to this Court and the same now stands registered as CWPOA No. 5500 of 2019. The contention of the petitioner is that respondents advertised five hundred posts of constable (male) in Police Department which included sixty posts in Shimla district for which he also applied. The petitioner was directed vide Annexure A1 by respondent No. 3 to appear before the Recruitment Board for physical efficiency test. He appeared before the said Board on 26.05.2015. As the petitioner successfully cleared the physical efficiency test, he was called upon vide letter dated 12.06.2015 (Annexure A2) to appear in a written test by the respondents. This written test was conducted on 21.06.2015 and the petitioner participated in the same vide Roll No. 588027. The petitioner secured fifty six out of eighty marks in the written test which included four grace marks. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that on the basis of his performance in the written test he ought to have secured at least sixty five marks and the marks which have been awarded to him are on the lower side and not inconsonance with how he performed in the written test. 4. The petitioner approached the authorities concerned for rechecking of the answer sheet, but as nothing was done, the same lead to the filing of the case. When the case was listed before the learned Tribunal on 30.07.2015, the following order was passed: “Mr. R.P. Singh, learned Assistant AG waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. Short reply be filed within two weeks. When the case was listed before the learned Tribunal on 30.07.2015, the following order was passed: “Mr. R.P. Singh, learned Assistant AG waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. Short reply be filed within two weeks. In the meanwhile, there shall be a direction to respondent No. 3, the Superintendent of Police, Shimla, District Shimla (H.P.) to consider and decide the representation dated 20.07.2015, Annexure A4, submitted by the applicant with a prayer for rechecking of his paper for recruitment to the post of Police Constable in accordance with law, by 03.08.2015 upto 5.00 p.m. As personal interview for the post is stated to be held on 04.08.2015, failing which the applicant shall be entitled to appear in the interview provisionally. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to produce certified copy of this order before respondent No. 3 forthwith, but not later than 31.7.2015 by 3.00 p.m. List on 14.8.2015. Copy dasti.” 5. The Court stands informed that pursuant to said order passed by the Court, the mark sheet of the petitioner was shown to him who gave his satisfaction qua the official answer key. This is evident from the documents which have been appended alongwith the reply filed by the respondents. 6. This Court is of the considered view that as the petitioner has expressed his satisfaction with regard to the evaluation of his question paper on the strength of the official answer key, therefore, now nothing survives in this petition. As rightly pointed out, the petitioner is now estopped from taking the stand that evaluation of his paper was not proper. Even otherwise, it is settled law that in the absence of rules providing for rechecking of reevaluation of answer sheets, the Courts cannot issue mandamus to this effect. 7. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.