IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Special Appeal No. 98 of 2008 Mohan Singh Bisht & another. .……… Appellants Versus Girish Chandra Pandey & others. ……… Respondents Mr. Subhash Upadhyaya, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Manoj Tiwari, Advocate for respondents Nos. 1 to 10. Mr. Sudhir Kumar, Brief Holder for respondents Nos. 11 & 12. JUDGMENT Coram: Hon’ble V.K. Gupta, C.J. Hon’ble J.C.S. Rawat, J. V.K. GUPTA, C. J. (Oral) CLMA No. 3729 of 2008: For the reasons stated, the application is allowed. The delay, in filing the Special Appeal, is hereby condoned. The appeal be treated to have been filed within time. The application stands disposed of. Special Appeal No. 98 of 2008: We have seen the judgment dated 25th April, 2008 passed in Writ Petition No. 806 of 2005 (S/S), as also the order dated 12th June, 2008 passed in M.C.C. No. 509 of 2008, and find that the learned Single Judge has not erred in any manner either in disposing of the writ petition or the recall application. Actually, the observation made in para 5 of the judgment dated 25th April, 2008 (supra) is a general statement of law, which is undisputed as far as the service jurisprudence is concerned. While disposing of the recall application, the learned Single Judge has given the liberty to the appellants to make a fresh representation to the competent authority for redressal of their grievances vis-à-vis the seniority position of the writ petitioners. We, by way of further explanation and clarification, do observe and direct that the appellants shall indeed be at liberty to bring forth 2 all the contentions before the competent authority with respect to their placement in the seniority list. The appeal stands disposed of. (J.C.S. Rawat, J.) (V.K. Gupta, C. J.) 23.06.2008 23.06.2008 G