ORDER

Heard Mr. Arbind Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. Radhika Raman and Mr. Ram Tujabh Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.

2. Present writ petition has been filed for following reliefs:—

“(i) For issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ/ order/ direction directing Respondents authorities to regularise the service of petitioner on the post of Lecturer, pursuant to law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court, as the petitioner is continuously discharging his duty as Lecturer on sanctioned vacant post, since the date of his appointment/joining on said post on 06/11/2001, on contractual basis, pursuant to Office order issued by Respondent no.5 vide letter no. 2(xxviii)/Estt/78/ dated 03/11/2001.

(ii) For issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction commanding Respondent authorities to fix and make payment of difference amount of arrear as well as current salary at the rate of salary fixed for the post of Lecturer working in regular pay scale as the petitioner having requisite qualification is performing similar work on a duly vacant sanctioned post on consolidated salary since his appointment by competent authority by applying all criteria of employment, and the same being in blatant disregard and violation of articles 14, 16 & 21 of the Constitution of India.

(iii) Any other relief that the petitioner may be found to be entitled to in the facts and circumstances of the present case.”

3. Mr. Arbind Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner has made several representation before the appropriate authorities from time to time for his regularization on the ground that he was appointed in the year 2001 and had joined the institution namely D.N.S. Regional Institute of Cooperative Management, Patna and he is successfully discharging his duty as Lecturer/Professor till date.

4. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner has been also acknowledge by the Head of the Institution including the Regional Director, Director and the Joint Director, National Council for Cooperative Training. The petitioner had undergone several training programmes from time to time. In spite of the satisfactory service record of the petitioner and the fact that he is working on the sanctioned post continuously, still he being engaged on contract basis. The petitioner has been continuously serving the post of Lecturer for nearly 22 years and as on date he has been receiving only remuneration amount of Rs. 40,000/- lump sum.

5. Learned counsel in support of his case has relied upon the Judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of Secretary, State of the Karnataka Vs. Uma Devi, (2006 (4) SCC 1) and has relied particularly on Paragraph 53 of the said Judgment which is reproduced inter alia hereinafter:—

“53. One aspect needs to be clarified. There may be cases where irregular appointments (not illegal appointments) as explained in S.V. Narayanappa [(1967) 1 SCR 128 : AIR 1967 SC 1071], R.N. Nanjundappa [(1972) 1 SCC 409 : (1972) 2 SCR 799] and B.N. Nagarajan [(1979) 4 SCC 507 : 1980 SCC (L&S) 4 : (1979) 3 SCR 937] and referred to in para 15 above, of duly qualified persons in duly sanctioned vacant posts might have been made and the employees have continued to work for ten years or more but without the intervention of orders of the courts or of tribunals. The question of regularisation of the services of such employees may have to be considered on merits in the light of the principles settled by this Court in the cases abovereferred to and in the light of this judgment. In that context, the Union of India, the State Governments and their instrumentalities should take steps to regularise as a one-time measure, the services of such irregularly appointed, who have worked for ten years or more in duly sanctioned posts but not under cover of orders of the courts or of tribunals and should further ensure that regular recruitments a