IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL CLMA DELAY CONDONATION APPLICATION NO. 4565 OF 2008 RESTORATION APPLICATION NO. 859 OF 2008 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 1745 OF 2003 (S/S) Ved Pal Singh ………………Petitioner. Versus State of U.P. and others. ………….Respondents. Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. H.M. Raturi, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent no.3. 25th July, 2008 Hon’ble P.C. Verma, J. CLMA Application No. 4566 of 2008 has been filed for condoning the delay in filing the MCC Restoration Application No. 859 of 2008. Grounds to condone the delay in filing the restoration application are satisfactory. Delay is condoned. Perused the grounds shown for recalling the order dated 8.10.2007. Grounds to recall the order dated 8.10.2007 are satisfactory. Order dated 8.10.2007 dismissing the writ petition for non-prosecution is recalled. Writ petition is restored to its original number. Both the applications are allowed. Heard Counsel for both the parties. 2 By means of present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 9th April, 1997 and 7th May, 1997, whereby the persons junior to the petitioner have been posted as Survey Naib Tehsildar. Further prayer has been made for a writ of mandamus commanding the Opposite Parties to consider the petitioner for regular promotion on the post of Survey Naib Tehsildar since persons junior to him have already been promoted on the post of Survey Naib Tehsildar and to direct the opposite parties not to revert the petitioner from the post of Survey Naib Tehsildar so long as he is the senior most person working in the office of Opposite Party No. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the substantive post of the petitioner is Survey Kanoongo, but since he was senior most Survey Kanoongo and as such, he was promoted in local arrangement to the post of Survey Naib Tehsildar vide order dated 16.10.1995 and in pursuance of the said order, he joined as Survey Naib Tehsildar on 16.10.1995. On 7th May, 1997, the opposite party no. 3 / District Record Officer / District Magistrate, Dehradun directed the reversion of the petitioner to his substantive post of Survey Kanoongo in view of the permanent arrangement having been made by the Board vide order dated 9th April, 1997, whereby six Survey Naib Tehsildar from other units have been transferred and posted at Dehradun. The petitioner has submitted that he is still holding the post of Survey Naib Tehsildar and Mr. Umrao Yadav and Krishna Kumar Singh have not joined the post of Survey Naib Tehsildar at Dehradun. Petitioner has further submitted that there are 40 posts of Survey Naib Tehsildar in the entire State of U.P. and at present, only 3 22 regularly promoted Survey Naib Tehsildar are working on the said posts and rest eighteen posts of Survey Naib Tehsildar are still substantively vacant. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent no. 3/ Deputy Collector, wherein it has been admitted that the petitioner is still working on the post of Survey Naib Tehsildar. The short grievance of the petitioner is that juniors to the petitioner namely Umrao Yadav and Krishan Kumar have been promoted from the post of Supervisor Kanoongo to the post of Survey Naib Tehsildar and 18 posts of Survey Naib Teshildar are still substantively vacant. According to the petitioner, If the vacancies are available and the factual submission made by the petitioner is found to be correct by the Chief Revenue Commissioner, the petitioner shall fall within the zone of consideration for promotion and the case of the petitioner may be considered for promotion. In view of the above, the Chief Revenue Commissioner is, therefore, directed to consider the case of the petitioner, in case the factual assertions made by the petitioner are found to be correct within a period of one month from the date of production of the certified copy of this order. Subject to aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of finally. No order as to costs. (P.C. Verma, J.) 25.7.2008 Rathour