- (1.) Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Senior Counsel for the writ petitioner, we find that four regularly appointed candidates have already joined the institution and further two more selected candidates have been issued appointment letter. As such there may not be any vacancy.
(2.) The claim of the writ petitioner for regularisation of his services in terms of Section 33-G(i) of the U.P. Act No. 5 of 1982 has been rejected. The question of staying the impugned order thus does not arise and it would virtually amount to giving final relief at this interim stage.
(3.) Accordingly, the special appeal is allowed. Thus, the interim order dated 02.01.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge is vacated.;