IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL CLMA DELAY CONDONATION APPLICATION NO. 4584 OF 2008 MCC RECALL APPLICATION NO. 863 OF 2008 IN CLMA DELAY CONDONATION APPLIATION NO. 11806 OF 2006 MCC RESTORATION APPLICATION NO. 11918 OF 2006 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 2947 OF 2001 (S/S) Kishan Singh Bhandari ………..Petitioner. Versus District Inspector of Schools, Hardwar & Ors. …………...Respondents. Mr. D. Bishnoi, learned counsel for the petitioner/applicants. Mr. H.M. Raturi, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents no. 1 and 2. None appears for the respondent no. 3. 25th July, 2008 Hon’ble P.C. Verma, J. Application No. 4584 of 2008 has been filed for recalling the order dated 28.2.2008, whereby the CLMA Delay Condonation Applications No. 11806 of 2006 and MCC Restoration Application No. 11918 of 2006 have been dismissed for want of prosecution. Perused the grounds shown for delay in filing the MCC Recall Application No. 863 of 2008. Reasons to condone the delay are satisfactory. Delay is condoned. Perused the grounds shown for recalling the order dated 28.2.2008. Grounds in order to recall the order 2 dated 28.2.2008 are satisfactory. Order dated 28.2.2008 is recalled. Perused the grounds shown for delay in filing the restoration application. Grounds with regard to delay in filing the restoration applications are satisfactory. Delay is condoned. I find sufficient reason to recall the order dated 5.10.2004. Order dated 5.10.2004 is recalled. Writ petition is restored to its original number. All the aforesaid applications are allowed. Heard learned counsel for both the parties. By means of present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent to ensure payment of salary to the petitioner of Class IV employee at Dr. Hari Ram Arya Inter College, Mayapur, District Hardwar w.e.f. 22.9.1995 upto date also for future months, along with other teaching and non – teaching staff of the institution as admissible under the rules. Counsel for the petitioner has confined his prayer to the extent that he may be permitted to file a fresh representation before the authorities concerned and the same may be decided as expeditiously as possible. Prayer is innocuous. Petitioner is permitted to file a fresh representation before the authority/authorities concerned within a period of two weeks stating therein his grievance regarding payment of salary of Class IV Employee w.e.f. 22.9.1995 upto date. If the same is moved, the Authority/Authorities concerned shall decide the same within a period of three months from the date of production of the certified copy of this order. 3 Subject to aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. (P.C. Verma, J.) 25.7.2008 Rathour