Hon’ble Arun Tandon, J.—Petitioner Sri Prem Narain Nigam claims to have been appointed as permanent Principal of C.O.D. Adarsh H. S. School, Kanpur and thereafter absorbed as permanent Principal of Shri Sidheshwar H.S. School, Gopalpur, Fatehpur w.e.f. 5th June, 1984. While working as permanent Principal of Shri Sidheshwar H.S. School, the petitioner according to his own allegation was placed under suspension w.e.f. 20th December, 1985.

2. According to petitioner he was not served with any charge-sheet and retired on 31st December, 1986 in view of his having attained the age of 60 years in December, 1986. Despite representations, the petitioner alleges to have not been paid any penny towards arrears of salary as well as retiral benefits. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner filed original suit, being Suit No. 47 of 1990. The relief sought therein was for payment of arrears of salary as well as pension. The suit is alleged to have been decreed on 30.1.1993 in absence of the defendants.

3. The defendants, therefore, filed an application under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure for restoration of the suit to its original number after recall of the ex parte order. The application was rejected by the trial Court vide order dated 12th October, 1995. The defendants preferred an appeal, which was also dismissed by the First Appellate Court on 1st December, 1998 being barred by limitation. Against the order dated 1st December, 1998, defendants filed a writ petition before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, being Writ Petition No. 6961 of 1999. The writ petition was ultimately allowed by this Court vide judgment and order dated 15th May, 2002 and the matter was remanded to the District Judge for re-hearing the application for condonation of delay in filing of the appeal, on merits.

4. The District Judge, after hearing the parties, allowed Section 5 application and transferred the appeal for hearing on merit to the Third Additional District Judge. The Appellate Court, after hearing the parties, allowed the appeal vide judgment and decree dated 7.1.2003. The appellate Court set aside the ex parte judgment and decree dated 30.1.1993. The suit was directed to be decided on merits afresh. Against the said order of the First Appellate Court, the petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 17271 of 2003.

5. In the said writ petition initially an interim order was passed by this Court, whereby the defendants were directed to pay a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- (Ten Lacs) to the petitioner within a period of one month or to appear before the Court for explaining as to why the amount has not been paid. The defendants appeared before the Court and filed an affidavit to the effect that the petitioner’s services were terminated by the Manager on 30th December, 1986 and all dues up to 31st December, 1986 were duly paid to the petitioner.

6. Petitioner contested the case so pleaded by the defendants in the aforesaid writ petition. The Hon’ble Court refused to enter into the merits of plea of dismissal from service of the petitioner, with the observation that the matter has been remanded back to the trial Court for adjudication on merits after setting aside the ex parte decree, as such this issue shall also be examined by the trial Court itself. The writ petition was accordingly dismissed with a direction upon the trial Court to decide the suit within six months from the date a certified copy of this order is filed before the Court concerned.

7. Petitioner thereafter moved an application for review of the judgment of this Court dated 9.9.2004. The review application was also dismissed vide judgment and order dated 20.5.2005. It is worthwhile to reproduce the order of the Court dated 20.5.2005, which amongst other notices the grounds raised for the review of judgment. The order read as follows :

“This is an application seeking review of my judgment and order dated 9.9.2004, whereby the writ petition filed by the applicant was dismissed with the direc