By the Court.—Heard Sri Manu Khare, Advocate on behalf of the petitioners.

2. Petitioners, who are two in number seeks a writ of mandamus directing the University to take a decision in accordance with the orders of Chancellor dated 20.1.2005 and to quash the appointment of two Lecturers in pursuance to Advertisement dated 14.3.2007 (Annexure 13 to the present writ petition).

3. Facts in short giving rise to the present writ petition are as follows :

University of Allahabad, which was earlier a State University, under the U. P. State Universities Act, 1973 is stated to have offered appointment to the petitioners, who are two in number, as Additional Lecturers in the Department of Geography vide order dated 6.4.1995 on a fixed honorarium of Rs. 60/- per lecture. A copy of the appointment letter is enclosed as Annexure 1 to the present writ petition.

4. It is the case of the petitioners that they have been functioning in terms of the said appointment since 1995. However, their designation was changed from Additional Lecturers to that of Guest Lecturers and their honorarium was increased to Rs. 100/- per lecture from Rs. 60/- per lecture subject to maximum of Rs. 5000/- per month. According to the petitioners they became entitled for regularization under Section 31 (3) (C) of the State Universities Act, 1973. For the purpose they made a representation before the Chancellor of the University under Section 68 of the State Universities Act, 1973. The Chancellor rejected their representation by means of the order dated 26.3.2002 and the Executive Council of the Committee also rejected the claim of the petitioners for regularization vide its Resolution dated 4.5.2002 after recording that the petitioners had not been appointed prior to the cut off date i.e. 30.6.1991 as provided for under Section 31 (3) (C) of the State Universities Act, 1973 as it then stood.

5. Thereafter, with reference to the judgment passed by the High Court in the case of Dr. Sangeeta Srivastava being Writ Petition No. 52001 of 2000 decided on 22.5.2002, the petitioners made a second reference to the Chancellor on 6.9.2002 being Reference No. 157 of 2002. This reference was also answered against the petitioners by the Chancellor vide order dated 31.12.2003/5.1.2004. The Chancellor recorded that the petitioners are not covered by the provisions of Section 31 (3) (C) of the State Universities Act, 1973. Their appointment as Guest Lecturers is not contemplated by the State Universities Act, 1973 and accordingly, their representation had no substance.

6. This order of the Chancellor was not subjected to any further challenge and has became final.

7. However, in view of the Act No. 6 of 2004 whereby Section 31 (3) (C) of the State Universities Act, 1973 was amended, the petitioners made a fresh representation for they being regularized under the amended provisions of Section 31 (3) (C) of the State Universities Act, 1973. This representation of the petitioners is stated to have been allowed by the Chancellor by providing that their claim may be examined under the provisions of U. P. State Universities Act, 1973 by the Executive Council of the University. It is this order that the petitioners seeks to enforce. They also challenge the advertisement dated 14.3.2007, which had been published for the post of Lecturers of Geography, as were vacant in the department.

8. Manu Khare, counsel for the petitioner could not demonstrate before this Court as how the petitioners answer the description of Lecturer or Part Time Lecturer so as to fall within the four corner of Section 31 (3) (C) of the State Universities Act, 1973. It could not be established as to how in the teeth of the findings of fact recorded in the earlier order of the Chancellor dated 31.12.2003 and 5.1.2004 qua their nature of appointment how could Section 31 (3) (C) of the State Universities Act, 1973 as amended by Act No. 6 of 2004 be attracted in their case.

9. We may record that there is absolutely no