SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS 0 6 .0 6 .2 0 2 3 WPSB No. 57 of 2008 Hon ’ble Vipin San gh i, C.J. Hon ’ble Rak esh Th apliy al, J. 1. Mr. S.S. Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Ms. Mamta Bisht, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. The Writ Petition was dismissed for non- appearance of the petitioner, and for want of prosecution, on 03.11.2008. 4. The petitioner moved the present Application, i.e. MCC No. 2123 of 2023 for restoration of the Writ Petition, along with an application seeking condonation of delay, being I A No. 2124 of 2023, only in January, 2023, i.e. after nearly 15 years. 5. The challenge in the Writ Petition was to the order dated 20.03.2008, passed by respondent no. 5, whereby the petitioner was informed that he had not submitted the bank draft of Rs. 700/ -, though it was claimed by the petitioner, in his application, that he had submitted the same, and on that count, the petitioner’s application for appointment to the post of Lecturer (B.Ed.) could not be considered. The petitioner also sought a direction commanding the respondents to accept the bank draft from him once again, and to allow him to appear for interview on 25.04.2008. 6. When the application was taken up by this Court on 12.04.2023, we had observed that, unless the petitioner could show that he had, indeed, obtained a bank draft of Rs. 700/ - in favour of the respondents, before submitting the application, the petitioner cannot be granted any relief. 7. The petitioner has filed a supplementary affidavit. Along with the supplementary affidavit, the petitioner has again placed on record the copy of his Application Form, wherein he claims to have submitted the bank draft. 8. Pertinently, even with the supplementary affidavit now filed, the petitioner has not placed on record any document to show that he had obtained the bank draft from any bank. Even otherwise, we are not inclined to allow the present applications, when there is absolutely no justification for condoning such a long delay in moving the restoration application. The reliefs sought in the Writ Petition related to appointment to the post of Lecturer (B.Ed.). The selection process was undertaken in the year 2008. At this stage, in the year 2023, such reliefs, in any event, cannot be granted to the petitioner. 9. The present applications are, accordingly, dismissed. ( Rak esh Th apliy al, J.) ( Vipin San gh i, C.J.) 0 6 .0 6 .2 0 2 3 0 6 .0 6 .2 0 2 3 Rahul