1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. Rule in both the petitions. At the request of and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, Rule is made returnable forthwith.

3. The challenge in these petitions is to the common judgment and order dated 15th September 2017 in Original Application No. 862 of 2010 and several other connected Original Applications instituted by the petitioners and others to question the denial of benefit of regularization to the petitioners and to also question advertisements dated 4th June 2010 and 2nd July 2010 by which posts of Post Graduate Teacher (PGT) and Trained Graduate Teacher (TGT) were sought to be filled in on regular basis.

4. The CAT, in the impugned judgment and order has held that the initial appointments of the petitioners in the years 2006/2007 i.e. about three years prior to the issuance of advertisement for filling up posts on regular basis, were appointments on daily wage basis, entitling them to no guarantee of regularization. The CAT has held that relaxations have been granted to the petitioners or similarly placed candidates and therefore, the relief of regularization cannot be granted to the petitioners.