Manisana, J.- Rule heard. Mr. D.N. Choudhury for the petitio­ners and Mr. B. Chaudhury for the respondents. 2. The dispute raised in this petition is substantially governed toy the decision of this Court made on 20.4.1987 in Civil Rule Nos 224 and 225 of 1978. The only question which is to be considered in this case is about the delay in filing the writ petition. The impugned order was made in the year 1975. 3. Mr. D.N. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioners, has submitted that the similarly situated employees of the Food Corporation of India ("FCF' for short) had been given benefits of the order of this Court referred to above by the FCI. The Courts to this country are primarily the Courts of equity, justice and good conscience (see Indira Bai vs. Nand Kishore, (1990) 4 SCC 668 ). Because of the fact that the petitioners could not come earlier, there would not be justification to penalise them for not having litigated. Although, there was no specific direction in the order of this Court made on 20.4.87, the benefits of that order would be extended to all such employees similarly situated. The FCI also could have given the benefits of that order to the petitioners also. In that view of the matter, it will be just, fair and will be in consonance with the equity if the benefit of the order made on 20.4.87 by this Court is extended to the present petitioners. Therefore, the delay is to be condoned on the facts and in the circums­tances of the case. 4. In the result, it is ordered and directed that the petitioners 14 and 15 shall be deemed to have been in continuous service as Assistant Grade-I (M) and the petitioners 1 to 13 as the Assistant Grade-II (M), even during the period after order of reversion dated 22.8.75. It is further directed that the petitioners shall be entitled to their respective scale of pay, seniority in their respective posts and other service benefits. 5. The writ petition is allowed and disposed of with the above directions. No costs.