IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL WRIT PETITION (S/S) NO. 1188 of 2007 Mahimant Singh . ………..Petitioners. Versus State of Uttarakhand and others. ………Respondents. Present: Mr. K.N. Joshi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.(Oral) Heard Mr. K.N. Joshi, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. The petitioner is a Class IV employee in a Government Inter College. For certain period, he had officiated as a Class III employee (clerk). The petitioner claims regularisation as well as the salary of a Class III employee for the period he has worked as such. In view of the Constitution Bench judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in State of Karnataka and others Vs Uma Devi (2006) 4 SCC 1, prayer of regularisation cannot be granted to the petitioner. As far as the salary of the petitioner during the period he worked on Class III in officiating capacity, the petitioner has not been able to place before this Court any law, which entitles the petitioner to get salary on the post he has been officiating. In fact the representation of the petitioner was dismissed vide order dated 1.8.2007, in which it has been categorically stated that the law by which said salary can be granted to the petitioner stood repealed in the year 1991, therefore, there is no law under which the salary can be granted to the petitioner. So far as the second prayer for grant of salary to the petitioner is 2 concerned, the same is also not acceptable. All the same, the petitioner has further pleaded that the salary of Class III, which has already been granted to him should not be recovered from him. This prayer of the petitioner is liable to be accepted inasmuch as the salary was not given to the petitioner on the basis of any misrepresentation or fraud on the part of the petitioner. Therefore, the Court holds the recovery from the petitioner, as not justified, to that extent the writ petition is allowed. This recovery shall not be made. It is further directed that the petitioner would be at liberty to persuade the authority to consider his promotion in accordance with law from Class IV to Class III under the prescribed quota of such promotion as and when such exercise is undertaken. Writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 04.8.2011 Rathour