IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4563 of 2007 1. NAND KISHORE YADAV, S/O RAGHUNANDAN PRASAD YADAV, R/O VILLAGE-GAHUMANI, P.S.-SIHENSHWAR, DISTRICT-MADHEPURA. 2. SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, S/O YUGESHWAR YADAV, R/O VILLAGE AND POST MAHESUA, TOLA NAVTOLIA, P.S. AND DISTRICT-MADHEPURA. 3. SANJEEV KUMAR, S/O GHANSHYAM PRASAD YADAV, R/O VILLAGE-BASANTPUR, P.S.-SIHNESHWAR, DISTRICT- MADHEPURA. 4. TARINI PRASAD RAM, S/O BINDESHWARI PRASAD RAM, R/O VILLAGE-ARTAHA, P.S.-RAIVIR, P.S.- SIHENSHWAR, DISTRICT-MADHEPURA. 5. SANJAY PRASAD YADAV, S/O LATE KULDIP YADAV, R/O VILLAGE-MALANDHA, P.S.-MAHUA BAZAR, P.S.- BASNAHI, DISTRICT-SAHARSA. ……………………PETITIONERS. Versus 1. B.N.MANDAL UNIVERSITY, MADHEPURA THROUGH ITS REGISTRAR. 2. THE VICE CHANCELLOR, B.N. MANDAL UNIVERSITY, MADHEPURA. 3. THE REGISTRAR, B.N. MANDAL UNIVERSITY, MADHEPURA. ……………………RESPONDENTS. ----------- 2 07.08.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the University. Petitioners have filed this writ application for a direction to the respondents to regularize their services on Class-III posts. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are covered by observations of the Constitution Bench made in paragraph 44 of the judgment in the case of Secretary, State of Karnatka and Others Vs. Uma Devi and Others reported in 2006 (2) PLJR 363 (SC). Therefore, the writ application may be disposed of with a direction to the University - 2 - authorities to examine the cases in the light of said observations of the Constitution Bench. Learned counsel for the University submits that the posts have now been advertised for regular appointment by open selection process and the petitioners have liberty to apply for their fresh appointment on the post on regular basis. The consideration of the petitioners case in view of the observations made by the Constitution Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court as referred to above is independent to any right of the petitioners to apply for their appointment on regular basis in response to the advertisement by the University. Therefore, this writ application is disposed of with a direction to the University authorities to examine the cases of the petitioners and ascertained as to whether their cases are fully covered by the said observations of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, or not. In case they find that the cases of the petitioners are fully covered by the said observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, they shall consider the cases of the petitioners for their - 3 - absorption/regularization. If they find that their cases are not so covered, they will have liberty to reject their cases but that will not prejudice the right of the petitioner to apply for fresh appointment in response to the advertisement by the University. The writ application is thus disposed of. Arvind/ (J. N. Singh, J.)