THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.31295 of 1998 DATE: 15-2-2008 Between: 1. V.Ramgopal and 3 others ….. Petitioners and 1. The Govt. of A.P. rep. By Secretary, Higher Education Dept., Secretariat, Hyderabad and 3 others …. Respondents THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.31295 of 1998 ORDER: This writ petition has a long and chequered history. It is, however, unnecessary to refer to all the details and it would suffice if this Court were to take note of the fact that the petitioners herein have been repeatedly filing writ petitions seeking regularization of their services as lecturers in aided colleges. Eventually, the Government framed a scheme of regularization which was notified in G.O.M.S.NO.328 dated 15.10.1997. On the ground that the petitioners did not satisfy the conditions prescribed therein, their request for regularization was rejected. Questioning the validity of certain conditions of the scheme, notified in G.O.M.S.NO.328 dated 15.10.1997, the petitioners herein filed W.P.No.8398 of 1998 which writ petition is said to be still pending on the file of this Court. In accordance with the scheme of regularization, prescribed under G.O.M.S.NO. 328 dated 15.10.1997, the Government considered the case of 37 persons and, on finding that they fulfilled the conditions prescribed therein, issued memo dated 9.10.1998 regularizing the services of these 37 part time lecturers as lecturers in aided colleges. In this writ petition, the petitioners seek inclusion of their names in the list of 37 part-time lecturers whose services were regularized as per memo dated 9.10.1998. Since the services of these 37 part time lecturers were regularized on the ground that they satisfied the conditions prescribed in G.O.M.S.NO.328 dated 15.10.1997, it is only if the petitioners succeed in W.P.No.8398 of 1998 and the conditions prescribed in G.O.M.S.No.328 dated 15.10.1997 to challenge is mounted therein, is struck down, would they be entitled to seek regularization of their services. It is not in dispute that the petitioners do not satisfy the conditions prescribed in G.O.M.S.NO.328 dated 15.10.1997. Since the petitioners have already sought the consequential relief of regularization of their services in W.P.No.8398 of 1998, a second writ petition, indirectly seeking regularization of their services and being treated on par with 37 part time part time lecturers who have not even been arrayed as respondents, cannot be entertained. Suffice to hold that the validity of G.O.M.S.NO.328 dated 15.10.1998, and the petitioners entitlement for regularization, of their services, would be examined in W.P.No.8398 of 1998. Smt.M.Vinobha Devi, Learned Counsel for the petitioners, would state that during the pendency of this writ petition, the services of two of the four petitioners have already been regularized (petitioners 1 and 2). Needless to state that dismissal of this writ petition would not disentitle them to the benefit of regularization of their services, which has already been granted in their favour. Since the relief sought for in this writ petition cannot be granted, the writ petition fails and is, accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs. __________ 15-2-2008 asp