IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (S/S) No. 992 of 2009 Naveen Chandra Pathak S/O Late Pitamber Dutt Pathak and 40 others. … Petitioners. Vs. Secretary, Education, State of Uttarakhand and four others. …Respondents. Mr. Lalit Samant, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioners. Mr. Subhash Upadhyay, Brief Holder, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 to 4. Mrs. Bina Pandey, learned Standing Counsel (U.P.Govt.) for the respondent no. 5. Date August 25, 2010. Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have sought a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to provide increments, time pay-scale and other consequential service benefits and difference of arrears of salary to the petitioners. Writ of mandamus has also been sought to direct the respondents to treat the petitioners regular incumbent from initial date of appointment on Class IV posts. The petitioners claim to have been working on the post of Anusevak/Paricharak in different Government Junior High Schools in district Pithoragarh, after having been appointed under the Dying-in- Harness Rules 1974, as detailed in paragraph no. 3 of the memo of writ petition. The grievance of the petitioners is that they are entitled to the benefits including the regular pay-scale in view of the Government Order No. 1095/15-5-95-30/82 dated 2-2-1996 but the said G.O. has not yet been implemented in their case. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners drew the attention of the Court to the recommendations made by the District Education Officer Pithoragarh to the Director, School Education, Uttarakhand, Dehradun vide Annexure Nos. 4, 5 and 6 to the writ petition, whereby request had been made to grant pay 2 scale of Rs. 2550-3200 to Anusevaks who were given appointment under the Dying-in-Harness Rules and to maintain their seniority from the date of their appointment. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submitted that the petitioners had already made a representation on 25-6-2009 to the Director concerned on the basis of the Government Orders mentioned in the representation. Since the District Education Officer Pithoragarh had already recommended the case of the petitioners for redressal of their grievances, therefore, it would be in the fitness of things as well as in the interest of justice to give liberty to the petitioners to make a fresh representation to the Director, School Education, who shall decide the same by a speaking and reasoned order considering the recommendations made by the District Education Officer. Accordingly, the petitioners are given liberty to make a fresh representation to the Director, School Education, Uttarakhand, Dehradun, who shall take a decision thereon keeping in view the recommendations made by the District Education Officer Pithoragarh on the subject (Annexure Nos. 4, 5 and 6 to the petition) by passing a speaking and reasoned order, expeditiously, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order along with the representation. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of finally. (B.S.Verma,J.) RCP