ORDER :

1. These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners aggrieved against the orders dated 11.03.2022 (Annex.15 in both the petitions), wherein it was observed that based on the order dated 21.10.1993 whereby petitioners were dismissed from the service, the petitioners were not in service.

2. It is, inter-alia, indicated in the writ petitions that the petitioners were appointed as Teacher Grade-III Level-2 by order dated 15.11.1989 and their services came to be confirmed by order dated 12.11.1992, however, on account of the fact that recognition granted by the State regarding petitioners’ qualification came to be withdrawn, the services of the petitioners came to be terminated by order dated 21.10.1993.

3. Aggrieved against the orders dated 21.10.1993, the petitioners preferred writ petition being CWP No.631/1994, wherein initially an interim order was granted by the Court, however, the petition came to be dismissed on 30.08.1995. Against the order dated 30.08.1995, the petitioners preferred intra-court appeal being DBSAW No.685/1995, which appeal also came to be dismissed by order dated 03.11.2004. The review petition filed was also dismissed and the Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the petitioners also came to be dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. However, despite dismissal of the writ petition, special appeal, review petition and the SLP, the petitioners continued in the service apparently on account of the fact that the interim order was granted in the writ petition by the learned Single Judge.

4. It is claimed that during the period the petitioners were in the service, they obtained qualification of B. Ed. from Kota Open University and Mahrishi Dayanand University, Rohtak and are now qualified. The petitioners were not granted annual grade increments and other service benefits and as such, they submitted a representation dated 10.07.2012 for grant of service benefits.

5. Submissions have been made that as the petitioners have obtained the qualification and have continued in the service, they were entitled to get benefit of regularization in the service with consequential benefits as was granted by this Court in Vinod Kumar vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5850/1993 decided on 20.07.2004, which was followed in Ladhoo Ram vs. The State of Rajasthan & Anr. : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3029/1998 decided on 05.08.2005. The petitioners filed writ petition being S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8814/2021 seeking all the service benefits as they were getting fixed salary of Rs.20,000/- per month only, wherein the respondent State sought time to file reply.

6. After filing of the writ petition, notice dated 07.03.2022 came to be issued to the petitioners calling upon them to clarify on the aspects that despite dismissal of their petition, special appeal and SLP under which valid order they were in the service and were getting the emoluments and why information about the dismissal of the petition was not provided to the Department. The order of dismissal was effective on account of final orders passed by the High Court and therefore, they must provide their explanation by 11.03.2022. The explanation was given by the petitioners, inter-alia, claiming that as the petitioners were in service for last more than thirty years and have subsequently obtained the necessary qualification and that one Vinod Kumar was granted benefit of regularization, who was similarly situated, they were entitled to be regularized with continuity in the service. Further, the Department was duly represented before the Court and as such, there was no reason to inform about the dismissal of the writ petition and special appeal.

7. By order dated 11.03.2022 (Annex.15) noticing the above fact, the competent authority came to the conclusion that on account of dismissal of the writ petition and special appeal, the dismissal from the service of the petitioners is effective and they were no more in the service.

8. Learned couns