M.N.Bhandari, J. - (1.) Bunch of the writ petitions was disposed of by a common order dated 8th of May, 2009 wherein following directions have been given:- "I. During continuation of the work, as detailed out hereinabove, the invocation of the last extension is arbitrary and illegal; and the consequential automatic termination orders of the petitioners are set aside. II. The RPSC/DPC selected candidates/employees are still not available and next academic session is about to start; even urgent temporary appointments under Rule 28 of the Rules of 1971 are not possible due to short span of one month and a half left to start with the process of admission and academic session, therefore, as per the aims and objects of the Scheme, respondents are directed to consider the cases of the petitioners for continuation in service till regularly selected candidates from RPSC/persons selected and recommended by the DPC for promotion are made available in the light of the above observations; III. Even in the case of appropriate order of continuation in service till regularly selected candidates from RPSC/DPC selected persons are available, the petitioners are not entitled for wages of the vacations, in other words when the schools are closed. IV. In case the regularly selected candidates from RPSC/persons selected and recommended by the DPC for promotion are made available, then the respondents can terminate services of the petitioners after preparation of the seniority list on the State level as per their date of appointment and merit assigned to them, by following the principle of "last come first go" to the extent of availability of the selected candidates and while doing so, the respondents will keep the interest of the present students and prospective students in view."
(2.) The appeals have been preferred by the petitioners as well as by the State Government.
(3.) We have issued the notices on the appeals preferred by the State Government, however, the grievances and issues set out by the petitioners-appellants (for short "the appellants") are different, thus bunch of the appeals preferred by the appellants were heard separately.;