1
Court No. 24
Writ Petition No. 116 (SS) of 1999
S. K. Sonkar and others ... Petitioners
Versus
State of U.P. and others ... Opposite parties
-----------
Hon'ble Rajiv Sharma, J.
Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
By means of instant writ petition, the petitioners, who are
sixteen in number, pray for the following reliefs:-
“(a) issue a writ of mandamus or a writ, order or
direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the
opposite parties numbers – 1 and 2 to forthwith issue
appropriate orders for continuance and regularization
of the petitioners’ on their respective post of
Lecturers in various Government Polytechnics in the
State of U.P. and to pay them salary regularly in the
approved scale of pay;
(b) issue a writ of mandamus or a writ, order or
direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the
Opposite Parties not to make any appointment on the
posts of Lecturers in various Government Polytechnics
in the State of U.P. without first regularising the
services of the petitioners’;
(c) ………
(d) … … …”
All these petitioners were appointed for a fixed term of one
year vide order dated 22.11.1996 on the post of Lecturer in
different Government Polytechnics in the State of Uttar Pradesh.
The said term was extended for a further period of one year vide
order dated 21.11.1997. As the petitioners were not allowed to
continue, the petitioners preferred the instant writ petition and
this Court vide order dated 27.1.1999 directed the opposite
parties to allow the petitioners to work on their posts.
In compliance of this Court’s Order dated 27.1.1999, the
petitioners were allowed to continue on the post in question and
2
services of the petitioners were regularized by means of the order
dated 13.8.2002. Subsequently, by the order dated 3.9.2007,
some of the petitioners were granted time scale w.e.f. 2004.
Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that though the
reliefs claimed in the writ petition have been granted, but some of
the petitioners have not been placed in the time scale, to which
learned counsel for the opposite parties submits that as the reliefs
have been granted in the instant writ petition, fresh cause of
action has accrued and the writ petition rendered infructuous.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous.
Dt.7.1.2010
lakshman/