Hon’ble Amitava Lala, J.—This writ petition has been made by the petitioner by saying that the grievance of such writ petitioners are fully covered by the order of this Court passed on 7.7.2009 in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 33048 of 2009 (Valentina Priya and others v. State of U.P. and others). The order of this Court is as follows :

“The petitioner who is in contract service as Lecturer.

Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that service tenure should not be replaced by any contractual lecturer.

Having heard learned Counsel for the parties, we are of the considered opinion that the actual controversy involved in this case is fully covered by the principle, which has been well settled by this Court as well as the Supreme Court in catena of decisions, that the ad hoc appointee will not be replaced by another ad hoc, consequently, we are of the view that the petitioner will continue till the regularly selected candidate joins the post. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.”

2. The aforesaid order is passed on the background that advertisement was made to appoint an ad hoc or contractual appointee to replace the existing ad hoc or contractual appointee. Howe