IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (SB) No. 370 of 2004 Dr. Kulwant Singh . ….Petitioner. Versus State of Uttaranchal and others. …Respondents. Mr. S.K. Mandal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. H.M.Raturi, Advocate for the respondents. Coram: Hon’ble J.S. Khehar, C.J. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. Hon’ble J.S. Khehar, C.J, (Oral) Insofar as the issue of grant of seniority and consequential promotional benefits are concerned, it is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that since the petitioner has already retired on attaining the age of superannuation in the year 2009, he does not wish to press this prayer. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, desires us to direct the respondents to count the petitioner’s qualifying service as commencing with effect from 1.9.1987 so as to determine the pensionery benefits payable to him. No such prayer has been made in the instant writ petition, and as such, the claim of the petitioner for pensionery benefit by treating service rendered with effect from 1.9.1987 as qualifying service is not within the ambit and scope of the claim made in the instant writ petition, and as such, cannot be acceded to. In view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, and as noticed in the opening paragraph, the instant writ petition is disposed of as having been rendered infructuous. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) (J.S. Khehar, C.J) 11.3.2010 Rathour