IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (S/B) No. 113 of 2005 Shiv Kumar Sharma ….…… Petitioner. V e r s u s Uttaranchal Pey Jal and others ………. Respondents. Mr. S.S. Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. D.S. Patni, Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Mr. Sudhir Singh, Advocate for respondent No. 3. Mr. Vinay Kumar, Standing Counsel (Govt. of Uttarakhand) for respondent No. 4. Date of Judgment: 15.12.2010 JUDGMENT Coram: Hon’ble Barin Ghosh, C.J. Hon’ble V.K. Bist, J. BARIN GHOSH, C.J. (ORAL) The main grievances of the petitioner have been met during the pendency of the writ petition. It is being contended that a certain sum of money due to the petitioner has not been paid on the ground that the same has been adjusted against the loan taken by the petitioner sometimes in 1981. According to petitioner, that loan had been recovered much before retirement of the petitioner from his salaries. There seems to be another dispute as regards over payment of salary. According to petitioner, the amount of salary, to which he was entitled, the same was paid and there was no over payment. 2. Petitioner, therefore, seeks to file an application for amendment of the writ petition. 3. Considering the matter as above, we dispose of the writ petition permitting the petitioner to file a fresh writ petition confining his claims as indicated above. (V.K. Bist, J.) (Barin Ghosh, C.J.) 15.12.2010 15.12.2010 Amit