JUDGMENT : By means of this petition, the petitioner has sought the following reliefs:- (i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of “Certiorari” quashing the impugned History Sheet no. 28 A opened against the petitioner at P.S. Kaladhungi, District Nainital by respondent no.2 and 3. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of “Mandamus” by directing and commanding the respondent no.2 to discontinue the surveillance against the petitioner in consequence of the History Sheet 28 A opened at P.S. Kaladhungi, District Nainital. (iii) Issue a writ order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in view of the fact and circumstances of the case. (iv) Award cost of petition to the petitioner.” 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that his history sheets were opened long back. He was kept under continuous surveillance, obstructed his day-to-day life. He is a civilized person in the society now. He has left the life of crime long back. No case is registered against him for more than a decade now. His wife is a Parshad. He wants to live a decent life. Untimely and frequent surveillance makes his life miserable. 4. This matter was heard on 14.12.2023 when this Court after hearing the parties passed the following order:- “Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the last FIR was lodged against the petitioner in the year 2009. For the last 14 years, he has been living a peaceful life. He is running a hotel/restaurant. His wife is a Parshad. Learned counsel for the petitioner also gives a statement that the petitioner has never been convicted in any of the offences. Let learned State Counsel would file a categorical affidavit, revealing therein, as to why the case of the petitioner has not been considered under the regulation 231 of the U.P. Police Regulations for closure of surveillance. Has there been any order passed by the Senior Superintendent of Police? Let a copy of this order be also forwarded to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Nainital, who shall look into it so that proper instructions are received in the Court to assist the Court in the matter. Let such affidavit be filed within ten days’ from today. List this mater on 08.01.2024.” 5. Let a copy of this order be also forwarded to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Nainital, who shall look into it so that proper instructions are received in the Court to assist the Court in the matter. Let such affidavit be filed within ten days’ from today. List this mater on 08.01.2024.” 5. Supplementary counter affidavit has not been filed by the State and it is recorded that the surveillance has been closed. According to the supplementary counter affidavit, in case, no criminal activity of the petitioner is noticed in future for sometime, closure of his history sheet may be considered. 6. Learned counsel for the State would submit that the surveillance order has already been discontinued. But, he would submit that keeping in view the past history of the petitioner, for some times, the history sheet may though remain continued without surveillance, but an order may be passed at any subsequent stage, if the petitioner lives a normal life. 7. Since surveillance order has already been discontinued and the police authorities have deposed before this Court that if in future the petitioner lives a normal life, discontinuance of history sheet may be considered. This Court considers that nothing needs to be done at this stage and the petition deserves to be disposed of. 8. The petition is disposed of accordingly.