THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH Writ Petition No.11995 of 2000 ORDER: The petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus directing the second and third respondents to regularise his services as a Lecturer in Mercantile Law in the second respondent-College. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it is stated that earlier the petitioner filed W.P.No.29018 of 1997 feeling aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents in regularising his services as a Lecturer. This Court by order, dated 08.10.1998, disposed of the said writ petition, in view of the Government issuing G.O.Ms.No.328, dated 15.10.1997, with regard to regularisation of part-time Lecturers and Junior Lecturers in the Government as well as Private Educational Institutions, directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. It is stated that subsequently, the petitioner made a representation to consider his case for regularisation of his services. But, however, the third respondent has issued advertisement on 05.09.1999 calling for walk-in-interview to teach Mercantile Law, without considering the petitioner’s candidature. That though the second respondent issued proceedings, dated 07.07.1999, continuing the petitioner for the academic year 1999-2000, the third respondent has failed to entrust the teaching classes to him. Therefore, the petitioner claims to have filed another writ petition, in W.P.No.19366 of 1999, seeking a direction to the third respondent to entrust classes, pending regularisation proceedings and after filing the said writ petition, as the third respondent entrusted the classes, the said writ petition was dismissed as infructuous. Now, the grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of the specific directions of this Court in W.P.No.29018 of 1997, dated 06.10.1998, till today no decision is taken by the second respondent for regularisation of his services and the third respondent is intending to appoint a new candidate for the post of Lecturer to teach Mercantile Law. Hence, the present writ petition. This Court, while admitting the writ petition on 06.07.2000, in W.P.M.P.No.15261 of 2000, directed the second respondent to engage the petitioner as a part-time Lecturer, if regular selection to the post is not made. It is further directed that if the second and third respondents initiate action for appointment of a regular Lecturer, the petitioner shall also be considered for the post provided he applies, having regard to his experience. As no counter affidavit is forthcoming and no one appeared for the respondents, I am not inclined to express any opinion as to the entitlement or otherwise of the petitioner for his appointment to the post of Lecturer in Mercantile Law. Admittedly, he is working as a part-time Lecturer. If that be so, any appointment even in any aided post of a private college shall be in accordance with the guidelines and orders issued by the Government from time to time keeping in view the reservations, the qualifications and the merit. As the petitioner is engaged and continuing as a part-time Lecturer on the strength of the interim order of this Court, it is appropriate that he shall be continued as such till the regular selection is made in accordance with law. In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of the interim order granted by this Court on 06.07.2000 in W.P.M.P.No.15261 of 2000. No costs. __________________ (V.ESWARAIAH, J) Dt.09.12.2010 VGB