Hon’ble Rajes Kumar, J.—Heard Sri Nisheeth Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri R.B. Singhal, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Amit Krishan, appearing on behalf of the respondents.

2. By means of the present petition, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 23rd June, 2011, passed by the State Public Services Tribunal, in Claim Petition No. 174 of 2011, by which the Tribunal has directed to consider the regularisation of the services of the respondents with effect from the date of existence of the vacancies, that is, 20th November, 2002, in accordance with the judgment of the High Court and also to grant all the consequential benefits arising out of it.

3. The brief facts, giving rise to the controversy involved in the present writ petition, are that the respondents were appointed as the Assistant Managers in the Greater NOIDA Industrial Development Authority on contractual basis initially for a period of 89 days. It is not clear from the pleadings whether the respondents have been engaged on the contractual basis pursuant to any advertisement, by following the proper procedure or not. It appears that the appointments of the respondents were not