WPSB No. 377/ 2001 Old No. 21940/88 Hon’ble P.C. Verma, J. Hon’ble B.S. Verma, J. (Restoration Appln. No. 8958/06) (Delay Condn. Appln. No. 8959/06) Heard learned counsel for the applicant/ petitioners. We have perused the application for condonation of delay supported by an affidavit. The reasons given in the accompanying affidavit of the application are satisfactory to condone the delay in filing the restoration application Accordingly, the delay in filing the restoration application is condoned. The reasons given in the accompanying affidavit of restoration application are also satisfactory. Hence, the order dated 27.02.2004 passed by this Court dismissing the writ petition for want of prosecution is hereby recalled. Let the petition be restored to its original number. However, it is made clear that the petitioner No. 1 was retired on the date of the passing of the order of this Court and the Petitioner No. 2 will retire after six months. So far as the claim of Sri Ram Nath- Petitioner No. 1 is concerned, it only survives to the extent of payment of pension. Hence, it is provided that the pension to be given to the Petitioner No. 1 shall be fixed on the basis of total service rendered by him and the last salary drawn by him. So far as the claim of Sri Sushil Kumar – Petitioner no. 2 is concerned, it is also provided that after his retirement, he shall also be given pension on the last salary drawn by him and total service rendered by him. Subject to above, the writ petition stands disposed of finally. (P.C. Verma, J.) (B.S. Verma, J.) 20-07-2006 Rajeev Dang