1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 430 OF 2008 IN MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION (REVIEW) ST.NO. 334/2008 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 1801 OF 1991(D) (Navnath Kashinath Pawar .v. Secretary, Shri Vasant Naik Education Society and others) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's Orders and Registrar's orders. Shri Anand Parchure, Advocate for the applicant. Shri F.T. Mirza, Advocate for the respondent No.1. CORAM : B.R. GAVAI, J. 05TH MARCH, 2008. Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties. This is an application for condonation of delay in filing application for review. The application is vehemently opposed by the learned Counsel for the respondents. Shri F.T. Mirza, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents seeks time to file reply on the ground that the President of the respondent No.2 has died and somebody else is occupying the post. The notice was issued on 30th January, 2008. Thereafter, time was also sought on behalf of the 2 respondents, which was granted. In that view of the matter, I am not inclined to grant further time. Taking into consideration the averments made in the application, the same is allowed. The delay is condoned. MCA (REVIEW) ST NO. 334/2008. This is an application for review. The same is taken on board for admission. Leave to join the Education Officer, Yavatmal as party respondent. Shri A.S. Sonare, the learned AGP waives notice for the newly added respondent. By way of present application, the applicant seeks review of the order dated 23rd June, 2004 passed in Writ Petition No. 1801 of 1991. It is the contention of the petitioner that vide order under review, this Court has specifically held that since the petitioner has actually worked as Headmaster, he was entitled to pay scale of Headmaster. It is submitted that though the petitioner was entitled to the arrears on account of implementation of Vth Pay Commission, the said arrears are denied to the petitioner. It is further submitted that though the respondent/management has received the arrears 3 payable to the petitioner, the same are not being paid to him. At least, prima facie, when the Court has held that the petitioner is entitled to the pay scales of Headmaster, it would mean that he is entitled to all the consequential benefits. S.O. to 2nd April, 2008 at the request of Shri F.T. Mirza, the learned Counsel for the respondent Nos.1 & 2. Learned AGP also to file an affidavit on behalf of the newly added respondent as to whether the respondent/management has been paid grant towards the arrears on account of implementation of IVth and Vth Pay Commissions. JUDGE *rrg.