CWP No. 2814 of 2008 17.12.2008 Present: Mr.Y.P. S. Dhaulta, counsel for the petitioner. Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General with Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy. A.G. for the respondents. The petitioner was a contractual appointee and his service came to an end in the year 1999 and the contract was not extended. However, again in 2003 the petitioner was engaged again on contractual basis. In these circumstances, now the petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer that the petitioner has completed eight years and be regularized. In support of his argument, it has been submitted that had there been no order of termination, the petitioner would have completed eight years by now and the next argument of the petitioner is that the juniors, who were retained, are being regularized and the petitioner is not getting benefit of the same. However, the petitioner could not substantiate that if he was terminated in the year 1999 and admittedly the petitioner had not challenged the same, then how can he claim continuity from 1999 to 2003. However, those who remain in service, now cannot be called juniors to the petitioner. There is no law which can condon four years of period of petitioner when he was not in service. There was definitely a break in the service of the petitioner. Now eight years would be counted in two phases. Firstly, the period which he had worked before 1999 and thereafter from the year 2003. It would in light of the Govt. order, contained in annexure PB dated 27.10.2008. With these observations and with the consent of the parties, the writ petition stands disposed of. ( Jagdish Bhalla), CJ ( Kuldip Singh) J. December 17, 2008 (sks)