- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) THE petitioners have once again come before this Court in the present writ application for seeking absorption/regularization in the Respondents Universities on Class IV Post after giving them age relaxation and preference over the others. According to them, these petitioners, 13 in number were engaged under Respondents University for certain period from 1989 1991 respectively and were terminated w.e.f. 1st February, 1991. They earlier approached this Court in W.P. (S) No. 2389 of 2001 for directing the respondents to take a decision to fill up the post of Class III and Class IV post after giving them age relaxation and preference for which an advertisement was also said to have been issued. The writ petition was disposed of without getting into merit in the controversy vide order dated 4th April, 2002 in the following terms: "Without giving any such direction, this Court feels that such discretion should be left with the Respondents if the petitioners file individual representation. If such representations are filed within a period of four weeks the Respondents will look onto it and pass orders in accordance with law within a period of four months thereafter. It goes without saying that the Respondents while considering the representations may, in their discretion, take into consideration the duration of engagement of the petitioners and if otherwise not prevented, then they may consider the desirability of passing orders redressing the grievances of the petitioners, but in accordance with law. Let it be recorded that this Court has not decided the claim of the petitioners in any way whatsoever. Mr. Mehta states that pursuant to the order dated 3.6.2001 the University has already issued a cheque for Rs. 7,905/ dated 16.8.2001 in favour of Sankadeep Sahu (petitioner no.1) but in his absence, the same has remained in the custody of the Respondents. He however states that the Respondents have no objection if Sankadeep Sahu (Petitioner no.1) presents himself before the Finance Officer of the University. He further states that if he does so, the University will release the cheque in his favour on proper identification/verification. They may do so. With the aforesaid observations, this writ application is dismissed as withdrawn."
(3.) THE reasoned order was passed thereafter by the Registrar of the University on 12th April, 2003, which is Annexure 7 to the writ application. The petitioners are relying upon the said reasoned order where it was indicated that on exigencies of work, these persons were engaged on daily wages against unsanctioned posts and subsequently due to non -availability of work their services were terminated. However, much reliance has been placed upon the observation made thereunder, according to which, it was observed that however as and when vacancies exist and posts advertised by the University in future their applications would be considered sympathetically along with other candidates considering their past experience.;