Purnendu Singh, J.—Heard Mr. Lalit Kishore, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Arbind Kumar Singh, Mr. Ayush Kumar, Mr. Kanishk Shankar and Mr. Chandan Kumar, learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. K.N. Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General assisted by Mr. A.B. Mathur, learned C.G.C., Mr. Amarjeet, learned J.C. to learned A.S.G., Ms. Prakritita Sharma, learned J.C. to learned A.S.G. and Mr. Kanishk Kaustubh, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The petitioner in paragraph no. 1 of the present writ petition has sought inter alia following relief(s), which are reproduced hereinafter:—

"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 after setting aside the order dated 10.08.2023 issued by the Respondent no. 3, whereby and where under the Respondent no. 3 denied the regularisation of petitioner ignoring the judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Narendra Kumar Tiwary and others vs. State of Jharkhand and others reported in 2018 (8) Supreme Court cases page- 238 merely on the ground that there is a Lack of specific provision in the recruitment Rules permitting regularisation or contractual employee.

ii. For issuance of a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ/ order/ direction directing the Respondents authority to regularised the service of the petitioner on the post of Lecturer or as per his entitlement in accordance with law pursuant to law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Narendra Kumar Tiwary case (supra) considering the judgment passed in Secretary State of Karnataka vrs. Uma Devi reported in 2006(4) SCC page -1, where by specific direction has been given in that contest to the Union of India, the take steps to regularise as one time measure, who have worked for ten years or more in on duly sanctioned post and since the petitioner is continuously discharging his duty since his appointment on sanctioned vacant post pursuant to office order issued by Respondent no. 5 vide letter no. 2(xxviii)Estt/78/ dated 03.11.2001 and thus the case of petitioner is fully covered under the afore said judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court.

iii. 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 rage 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.

iv. Any other relief that the petitioner may be found to be entitled to in the facts and circumstances of the present case."

BRIEF FACTS:

3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner applied for his appointment as lecturer in D.N.S. Regional Institute of Co-operative Management. The appointment of the petitioner was after due process of selection i.e., there was proper scrutiny of his application and after holding of the interview, he was declared selected on 03.11.2001 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition). The petitioner had joined his service on 06.11.2001 (Annexure-2 to the writ petition). Thereafter, the respondent no. 5 sought ex-post-facto approval from respondent no. 3 regarding appointment of petitioner and others (Annexure- 3 to the writ petition). The contract of the petitioner was extended from time to time and is continuing till date for which, extension was approved on dated 14.02.2022, (Annexure-5 to the writ petition). The petitioner having become entitled for absorption, filed several representations from time to time before the respondent no. 3 and other competent authorities for a sympathetic consideration for regularization of his services and to fix his