Mansoor Ahmad Mir, C.J (Oral):— Ms. Amrita Messie, learned counsel for Dr. Manica Tomar, (respondent No. 2 in LPA No. 16 of 2012 and respondent No. 1 in LPA No. 32 of 2012), stated at the Bar that the University has redressed the grievance of the said respondent rendering both the Letters Patent Appeals infructuous. The only apprehension expressed by the learned counsel for Dr. Manica Tomar is that the University may not grant the financial benefits to Dr. Manica Tomar at par with Dr. Monica Sharma (appellant in LPA No. 16 of 2012 and respondent No. 2 in LPA No. 32 of 2012) and therefore, prayed that liberty may be reserved to Dr. Manica Tomar to seek appropriate remedy by resorting to appropriate proceedings. Her statement is taken on record.
2. Ms. Nishi Goel, learned counsel for Dr. Monica Sharma (appellant in LPA No. 16 of 2012) stated that the writ petition as well as both the Letters Patent Appeals may be disposed of as settled. Her statement is taken on record.
3. In view of the above, coupled with the orders passed by this Court from time to time and the order issued by the University, the writ petition and the Letters Patent Appeals are disposed of as settled, with liberty to Dr. Manica Tomar to seek appropriate remedy at appropriate stage.
4. Pending CMPs, if any, also stand disposed of.