Alok Kumar Sinha, J.—Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents in all the writ applications.

2. In all the writ applications, the petitioners have prayed for quashing office order 508/2017, dated 12-12-2017, issued by the Registrar of the University, by which, previous office orders appointing/absorbing the different petitioners against different posts in the services of the University has been withdrawn.

3. Since common question of law is involved in all writ applications, therefore, they are heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. For the sake of convenience and brevity, the facts of CWJC No. 1543 of 2018 are only being noticed, unless otherwise indicated.

FACTS OF THE CASE

4. The case of the petitioners inter alia is as follows:—

(i) The petitioners in CWJC No. 1543 of 2018 (Pankaj Kumar & Anr.) state that pursuant to an advertisement dated 14.08.2006 (Annexure 1) issued by the University inviting applications for the post of Junior Engineer on contractual basis, they applied, participated in the selection process and were duly selected. Appointment letters were issued to them vide Office Order No. 220/2006 dated 28.10.2006 placing them as Junior Engineers on a fixed consolidated remuneration for a period of 11 months. A copy of the composite appointment order has been brought on record as Annexure- 2 to the writ application. The petitioners joined their respective posts and continued to work (Annexure 3). Their contractual engagement was extended from time to time by the competent authorities of the University (Annexure 4).

(ii) During the currency of their contractual service, the petitioners submitted representations before the University authorities as well as before the Hon’ble Chancellor for their absorption/regularisation against sanctioned vacant posts of Junior Engineer (Annexure 5). It is pleaded that in respect of several similarly situated employees, the Hon’ble Chancellor had earlier issued directions for regularisation, and those directions had been acted upon by the University (Annexure 6).

(iii) In so far as the present petitioners are concerned, it is stated that the Registrar of the University, taking note of their continuous satisfactory service and availability of sanctioned posts, sent a proposal recommending their absorption in regular service (Annexure 9). Thereafter, by Office Order No. 332/2013 dated 20.12.2013, the petitioners were absorbed in the regular establishment of the University on the posts of Junior Engineer. The said absorption order has been brought on record as Annexure-10 to the writ petition. In pursuance thereof, their pay was fixed, they were brought on the regular pay-roll and they continued to function as Junior Engineers in the regular cadre.

(iv) The petitioners assert that they discharged their duties without any complaint or blemish until the impugned Office Order No. 508/2017 dated 12.12. 2017 suddenly came to be issued by the University, whereby the earlier orders of absorption/regularization of the petitioners and several other employees (petitioners of other writ applications) were cancelled. The impugned order refers to an enquiry ordered by the Hon’ble Chancellor into the actions of the then In-charge/Acting Vice-Chancellor of the University for the period 26.04.2013 to 28.02.2014, and to letters dated 21.8.2017 and 06.09.2017 issued from the Governor’s Secretariat. The common impugned order dated 12.12.2017 has been brought on record and challenged by the petitioners.”

5. It is the categorical case of the petitioners that no notice, no show-cause and no opportunity of hearing was afforded to any of them before passing the impugned order dated 12.12.2017. The petitioners state that the report of the Enquiry Committee headed by the Hon’ble Justice (Retd.) Sri Akhilesh Chandra and another member, Dr. Prema Jha, was also never supplied to them. The letters bearing no. TMBU-15/2017- 2024/GS(I) dated 21.8.2017 and lett