Hon’ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.—Heard Sri H.R. Mishra, Senior Advocate for the petitioner; Sri Rakesh Kumar for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Sri S.P. Sharma for respondent No. 3. As requested and agreed by learned counsel for the parties, the Court proceeds to decide the matter under the Rules of the Court at this stage.

2. The first two writ petitions were heard on 1.9.2011 and judgment was reserved. Before the judgment could be prepared and delivered, the other matters namely Civil Misc. Writ Petition Nos. 3684 of 2009, 6038 of 2009, 6039 of 2009 and 6040 of 2009 came up for hearing on 21.3.2012 and since they also involved same questions of facts and law as in the earlier two writ petitions, learned counsel for parties not only adopted the arguments already advanced in earlier two writ petitions but made some further arguments and, therefore, judgment was reserved therein also so that all these matters may be decided by a common judgment and hence I proceed accordingly.

3. The factual and legal aspects in all the matters are similar and common and, therefore with the consent of learned counsel for parties, pleadings and facts of writ petition No. 6036 of 2009 are being discuss