THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU W.P.No.15931 of 2011 ORDER: This writ petition is filed to direct the respondents to reinstate and regularise the petitioner in the aided post of Secondary Grade Teacher in respondent No.4-School with effect from 01.07.2003 notionally with all consequential and attendant benefits. 2) The brief facts that are necessary for the disposal of the writ petition are as follows: Prema Samajam was established in the year 1930 and registered in the year 1941 with the service and objects of feeding the disabled poor, helping the distressed, maintenance of asylums and orphanages, free education to the poor, medical aid to the poor, cremation of unclaimed dead, uplift of depressed classes, improvement of sanitation in slum areas, service to leprosy patients, prevention of sacrifices of animals and birds, service in epidemics and accidents, maintenance of maternity and child welfare centres, medical aid to the villagers and free homeo clinics, free typewriting and free tailoring training having branch at Chodavaram. Prema samajam established fourth respondent-school with the grant-in-aid from respondents 1 to 3 and running the same by imparting good standard of education to the poor children to fulfil its service and objects. To cope up with the workload, in the interest of the students and smooth working, the fourth respondent has appointed qualified candidates in the posts of secondary grade teachers and other posts of language pandits. The petitioner was appointed in the vacancy of aided post of secondary grade teacher on 01.08.2001 along with three others and continued as such with a fond hope that he would be regularised in the said post as he was appointed against the said vacancy by due process of law i.e., after regular selection process as per the Rules and Guidelines issued by respondents 1 to 3. Respondent No.4-school informed respondent No.3 through proceedings dated 10.08.2001 about the appointment of the petitioner and three others in the aided posts. While so, respondent No.4 surprisingly issued notification dated 13.06.2003 to fill up the aided posts including the four secondary grade teachers in one of which the petitioner is working. However, the petitioner applied in response to the notification and attended for the written test and oral interview on 25.06.2003, faired well and his services have to be regularised against the existing vacancy of OC category. Without considering the case of the petitioner, the respondents have appointed outsiders against rules and terminated the services of the petitioner orally on 01.07.2003 without assigning any reason or issuing any notice. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner was appointed in the fourth respondent-school and the said fact of appointment has been intimated to the third respondent-District Educational Officer and therefore, his services have to be regularised. It is his further contention that without there being any notice, the petitioner was ordered to be removed from service. 4. The petitioner was said to have been appointed on 01.08.2001 as a Secondary Grade Teacher in respondent No.4-School without there being any notification or calling for applications. In fact, to cope up with the work and for smooth working of the school, the fourth respondent directly appointed the petitioner. Though the petitioner has been appointed in the aided post, the appointment of the petitioner is not in accordance with law. When the appointment of the petitioner is not in accordance with law his services cannot be regularised. In the year 2003 certain posts, including the post held by the petitioner, have been notified and some persons were selected. Therefore, the petitioner was removed from service after following the due process. The petitioner kept quiet for all the eight long years after third party interest is created. No explanation is given for not approaching the court immediately after regular selection process. Therefore, the writ petition is devoid of merits on the grounds of laches and delay, and the same is liable to be dismissed on the ground of laches and delay. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. K.C.BHANU,J Dt.13.06.2011 lvl THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU W.P.No.15931 of 2011 Dt. 13.06.2011