K L. Sharma, J. - (1.) Both the writ petitions relate to the adhoc employees of the establishment of District Judge, Unnao and raise common questions of law and facts. Hence these writ petitions have been heard together and disposed of by a common judgment.
(2.) In Writ Petition No. 6219, the petitioners No. 1,2 and 3 were appointed by order dated 31-1-1989 of the District Judge, Unnao vide Annexures 1 to 4 of the writ petition on adhoc basis as Copying Clerk and they joined their service on 1st February, 1989, and the petitioners No. 4 and 5 were appointed by order dated 1st March, 1990 of the District Judge, Unnao on adhoc basis as Copying Clerk vide Annexures 5 and 6 and they joined on 2nd March, 1990 All these petitioners have been continuing on ad hoc appointment and they have not appeared at the regular recruitment examination held on 27-6-1993. They claimed that they are entitled to be considered for regularisation in accordance with the U. P. Regularisation of adhoc appointments (on posts outside the purview of the Public Service Commission) Rules, 1979, hereinafter referred to as the Rules and amended on 7th August, 1989 and Circular letter of the High Court dated 24th December, 1992, hereinafter referred to as the Circular, but the District Judge, Unnao had not considered the case of the petitioners and has proceeded to hold the competitive examination for regular recruitment and threatened the petitioners that their services would come to an end on 31st August, 1993.
(3.) In Writ Petition No. 6220 (SS) of 1993, all the four petitioners were appointed by order dated 19th March, 1991 of the District Judge, Unnao on adhoc basis as Copyist initially for a period of six months, but they have been continuing on adhoc appointment extended subsequently on different dates vide Annexures 1 and 2 to the writ petition. These petitioners claimed that they have completed more than two years of service continuously and are awaiting their regularisation under the Rules and the Circular, but the District Judge, Unnao has held a competitive examination for regular recruitment on 27-6-1993 and has refused to consider the petitioners for their regularisation, limiting their appointment to 31-8-1993.;