IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1436 of 2000 NARENDRA SINGH Versus THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS ----------- For the Petitioner: Mr Santosh Kumar Sinha -2, Advocate For the Union of India: Mr Arun Kumar Arun, Advocate ---- 3. 09.09.2008 Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the respondents. The prayer in this writ application is to consider the petitioner for regularisation/absorption in view of his continuance for 10 years on the post of Physical Teacher in the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan II, ASC Centre (North) Paharpur, District Gaya. It is his case that he was duly registered with the Employment Exchange and in pursuance of which his name came to be sponsored for the appointment in question. The counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent institution states that the petitioner did not quality in the written examination held for appointment. It is the case of the petitioner that persons like him were not required to undergo written examination. Be that as it may, the procedure applicable for appointment is an aspect to be considered by the respondents themselves and in so far as the issue for regularisation is concerned it is no more resintegra in view of judgement of the Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka & Ors. Vrs Uma Devi, reported in AIR 2006 SC 1806. That the petitioner may not have been a party before the High Court of Gauhati is not a relevant aspect if the petitioner is otherwise covered by the guidelines given therein. Entire issue of his regularisation/absorption shall necessarily be dependent as to whether he still continues in service as regularisation/absorption is not a mode of fresh appointment. The writ application stands disposed in the aforesaid terms. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)