JUDGMENT :

VINIT KUMAR MATHUR, J.:— Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The present batch of writ petitions are based on identical facts and involving common point of law, therefore, the same are being disposed of by this common order.

3. Brief facts which are required to be noted for deciding the controversy are that the petitioners were appointed on different posts viz. Chowkidar/Peon, Book Attendant, LDC, Library Assistant, Junior Accountant, Accountant, Helper, Staff Nurse, Sweeper, Rakshak, Lab Bearer, Lab Attendant, Book Lifter, Security Guard, Matron, Driver/Peon, LDC cum Computer Operator in the respondent- Jai Narayan Vyas University, Jodhpur on different dates through the placement agency/casual basis/daily wage basis. Some of the petitioners have served the respondent No. 1 in their respective capacities for a very long time. Since, the position on which the petitioners are working and the period since when they are working, have not been disputed, therefore, the individual details of the petitioners are not being mentioned in this order. The petitioners have represented to the respondents from time to time for regularization of their services on the strength of the judgments passed by this Court in the following cases:—

4. The principal argument of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the similarly situated persons have approached this Court by way of filing number of writ petitions and the same were allowed by this Court. Learned counsel further submits that a writ petition being SBCWP No. 8660/2011 filed by similarly situated person namely Jitendra Kumar was allowed by the learned Single Bench and thereafter the respondent-University preferred Special Appeal against the order of the learned Single Bench being DBSAW No. 354/2014 ( JNVU v. Jitendra Kumar ), which was dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court on 18.07.2014 and thereafter, an SLP No. 30831/2014 ( JNVU v. Jitendra Kumar ), filed against the Division Bench judgment dated 18.7.2014 too was dismissed by the Apex Court vide judgment dated 24.11.2014.

5. Another bunch of writ petitions were allowed by the Single Bench against which respondent-University preferred Special Appeal before Division Bench of this Court led by D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 347/2019 ( Jai Narain Vyas University, Jodhpur v. Mukesh Sharma ), which was dismissed vide judgment dated 13 08.2021. The respondent-University challenged the order of Division Bench by way of filing Special Leave Petitions before Hon'ble the Supreme Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide judgment dated 28.03.2022, disposed of these Special Leave Petitions with a modification that the petitioners will be entitled to the actual benefits for a period prior to three years of filing of the writ petitions only. The other directions gi