IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7550 of 2009 SHASHIKANT PRASAD SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 4 18.11.2010 Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Petitioner has filed this writ application for a direction to the respondents to consider his case for regularization on the ground that he is working as lecturer in the college in question since 11.8.1980. By filing a supplementary affidavit today he has brought on record certain documents which show that at one point of time his case was pending consideration for absorption as lecturer at the University level. Though the petitioner places reliance for such a direction to the Screening Committee on the basis of Regularisa Statutes, in the light of the Judgment of Division Bench in the case of Dr. Shiv Narain Yadav & ors. Vs. The State of Bihar & ors reported in 2001 (2) PLJR 817, learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that now no reliance can be placed on the said Statutes as the same have already been held ultra vires by this Court. However, he submits that 2 since the University had at one point of time taken in the case of the petitioner for consideration for absorption as lecturer at the University level, the respondent concerned be directed to take a final decision in the matter in terms of the observations of the Constitution Bench made in paragraph 44 of the Judgment in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka vrs. Uma Devi, reported in 2006 (2) PLJR (SC) 363. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that from the materials on record it is clear that appointment of the petitioner was illegal and, therefore, the benefit of the said Judgment may not be available to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner disputes the said submission of the learned counsel for the respondents. He submits that in view of the observations made by the Constitution Bench, it is the University authorities who have to come to a final conclusion in the matter after examining his case. In the circumstance, the writ application is disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities of the University to consider the case of the petitioner in the light of the observations made by the Constitution Bench in paragraph 44 of the said Judgment. A decision in this respect either way 3 in accordance with law should be taken by the University authorities within three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court is not expressing any opinion with respect to the validity or legality of the appointment of the petitioner which is also to be considered by the University authorities on its own merit. This writ application is disposed of. Anilkr.sinha (J.N.Singh,J.)