IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Review Application (M.C.C.) No. 1033 of 2009 On behalf of applicant- Manohar Singh Bhandnari IN Special Appeal No. 32 of 2006 Govind Singh Bisht & another …….. …… Appellants Versus Registrar Co-operative Societies Uttaranchal, Dehradun and nine others....……… Respondents Coram:- Hon’ble J.S. Khehar, C.J. Hon’ble Tarun Agarwala, J. Present: Mr. B.S. Adhikari, Advocate for the review applicant Mr. K. Tiwari, Advocate for the District Co-operative Bank. Mr. P.C. Bisht, Advocate for respondent No.1. Date of Decision: 26.02.2010 J.S. Khehar, C.J. (Oral) (Delay Condonation Appln. No.11467 of 2009) Learned counsel for the respondents have no objection, if the Delay Condonation Application is allowed. In view of the above, delay condonation application is allowed. Delay of 17 days in filing the instant review application is hereby condoned. (Review Appln.No.1033 of 2009) Through the instant review application, the applicant, who was neither one of the petitioners nor arrayed as a respondent, seeks a clarification of the order dated 11.11.2009 passed by this Court, disposing of Special Appeal No.32 of 2006. Learned counsel for the applicant has invited our attention to the operative part of the judgment dated 11.11.2009, so as to contend that by the aforesaid judgment, the order of promotion dated 04.01.2003 has been quashed. A copy of the order dated 04.01.2003 has been appended to the review application as Annexure-3. Learned counsel for the applicant vehemently contends that, 2 while examining the claim of the petitioners in Writ Petition (SB) No.234 of 2003, this Court was concerned only with promotions from Grade III to Grade-II, depicted at serial No.2 in the order dated 04.01.2003, whereas the aforesaid order dated 04.01.2003 also dealt with promotions from Grade-II to Grade-I and from Grade-IV to Grade-III. It is pointed out that the order passed on 11.11.2009, would have the effect of setting aside the petitioners promotion as well, even though the same was not a subject matter of challenge. It is, therefore, the contention of the learned counsel for the applicant, that the determination rendered by this Court in Writ Petition (SB) 234 of 2003 should be clarified to the effect, that the same pertains to promotions depicted at serial No.2 i.e. from Grade-III to Grade-II only. 2. Learned counsel for the respondent Bank does not dispute the factual position brought to our notice by the review applicant. 3. In view of the above, the instant review application is allowed. The order rendered by this Court in Writ Petition (SB) No.234 of 2003, dated 25.04.2006 in quashing the order dated 04.01.2003 be read as being relatable to promotions at serial No.2 i.e. from Grade-III to Grade-II and not the other promotions recorded in the said order (at serial No.1 from Grade-II, to Grade-I and at serial No.3 from Grade -IV to Grade-III). 4. The review application is disposed of with the aforesaid clarification. (Tarun Agarwala, J.) (J.S. Khehar, C.J.) 26.02.2010 P.Singh