SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS D1- 58(2) CLCON No.368 of 2025 Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Devesh Ghildiyal, Brief Holder for the State. The petitioner has brought to the notice of this Court that the order dated 26.11.2024, passed in Writ Petition (S/S) No.1904 of 2024, Praveen Kumar Vs. State of Uttarakhand and Others, has been wilfully disobeyed. In the case of Praveen Kumar (supra), the Coordinate Bench of this Court, on 26.11.2024, observed as follows:- “6. In view of the statement and submission as advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, all these writ petitions are being disposed of in terms of the judgment dated 22.08.2024 passed by the coordinate Bench in WPSS No.282 of 2022 and other connected petitions.” The basis of the order dated 26.11.2024 is the judgment dated 22.08.2024, passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in WPSS No.282 of 2022, Nishkar Kumar Aggarwal and Others Vs. State of Uttarakhand and Others; and connected matters, in which the Court has held as follows:- “6. In view of consensus between learned Counsel for the parties that the question involved in these writ petitions stand covered by the judgment dated 27.03.2017 rendered in WPSS No.1955 of 2015 and other connected petitions, therefore, present writ petitions are allowed. The Director, Elementary Education, Uttarakhand (respondent no.3) is directed to release benefit of selection grade/promotion grade/accelerated career progression (A.C.P.) to petitioners from due date, after taking into account, their entire length of service, within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order.” Learned State Counsel submits that the benefit of selection grade/promotion grade/accelerated career progression has been given to the petitioner on due date after taking into account his entire length of service. A response affidavit has also been filed. Learned counsel for the petitioner admits this fact. Learned State Counsel also admits that beyond it, the matter for pension is also underway, but, according to him, that was not the mandate in the order of which disobedience is reported. In view of the statement given by learned counsel for the parties, nothing survives in this writ petition. It stands disposed of, accordingly. (Ravindra Maithani J.) 31.10.2025 RV