Court No.2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL. Writ Petition No. 1964 of 2003 Deep Chandra Harbola .................. Petitioner. Versus State of Uttaranchal through Secretary Irrigation Department, Government of, Uttaranchal, Dehradun and four others. ............... Respondents. .................... Sri Sri Manoj Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri Paresh Tripathi, learned Brief Holder on behalf of the State of Uttarakhand/respondent Nos. 1 to 4. Smt. Beena Pandey, learned Standing Counsel for the State of U.P./respondent No.5. Dated: May 14, 2008. Hon’ble P.C. Verma, J. Following prayers have been made by the petitioner in the writ petition. (1) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature mandamus declaring the condition regarding ceiling on the maximum salary payable to work charge employee as contained in G.O. dated 26.08.1999 as arbitrary and illegal (Annexure No.3.) (2) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus declaring he condition regarding imposition of ceiling in respect of Dearness Allowance and bonus payable to work charge employees as contained in orders dated 1.02.2001 and 1.3.2001 issued by respondent No.2 as arbitrary and illegal. (3) To issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to consider and regularize the services of the petitioner on Class III post of Supervisor or any suitable equivalent post w.e.f. the date when juniors to him were promoted. (4) Issue any other writ, order or direction, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. (5) Award the cost of the writ petition in favour of the petitioner. 2. So far as prayer Nos. 1 & 2 is concerned the Government Order dated 26.08.1999, which is also impugned in this petition, has been quashed and controversy has been resolved by judgment and order dated 04.03.2006 rendered by Division Bench of this Court in Special Appeal No. 66 of 2005, State of Uttaranchal and others versus Pushkar Bhatt and others etc. etc, against which the petition for Special Leave to Appeal (No. 4083 of 2007) filed by the State of Uttaranchal has also been dismissed by the Apex Court, vide order dated 19.02.2007. 3. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner has been serving on the post of Supervisor in the department since 1980. 4. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances, no grievance survives as prayed in prayer Nos. 1 & 2. 5. So far as the prayer No. 3 is concerned, since the petitioner’s case filed with in the cut of date to be considered for regularization under the rules and juniors to him have been regularized as alleged by him, therefore, the respondents are directed to consider the regularization of the petitioner under the Uttaranchal Regularization of Ad-Hoc Appointments (On Posts Outside the Purview of the Public Service Commission) Rules, 2002. 6. With these observations, the petition is allowed accordingly. (P.C. Verma, J.) 14.05.2008 P.Singh