W.P. No. 1934(SS) 05: Hon’ble M.M. Ghildiyal, J. Heard Sri N.S. Pundir, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the State/respondents. Counsel for the petitioners has prayed that he does not want to press the 1st prayer of the writ petition at this stage, which pertains to regulariasation of the petitioners in the Department. Learned counsel for the petitioners has confined his argument to the 2nd prayer which is against the ceiling fixed by the Govt. on Dearness Allowance payable to the petitioners. Counsel for both the parties agreed that the writ petition may be disposed of at this stage itself, in view of the fact that the controversy, relating to imposition of ceiling on Dearness Allowance, has already been settled by the Division Bench of this Court on 04.03.2006 in Special Appeal no. 66 of 2005 State vs. Pushkar Bhatt and others, as such, the present writ petition may also be disposed of on the same terms and observations expressed in the aforesaid Special Appeal. In view of the aforesaid statement advance by the learned counsel for the parties, the present writ petition is also disposed of on the same terms and observations made in Special Appeal no. 66 of 2005 State vs. Pushkar Bhatt and others, delivered on 04.03.2006. (M.M.G., J.) 10.07.2006: NCM: