SADA NAND SHARMA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Prakash Padia, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Saral Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel.

(2.) By means of the present writ petition, the petitioners are challenging the order dated 11.08.2000, annexure-12 to the writ petition, by which the claim of the petitioners for the wages for the period prior to the date of regularization has been denied.

(3.) Brief facts of the case are that the petitioners have been appointed as Lecturers on adhoc basis on 22.10.1996 for a period of one year. The period of engagement has been subsequently extended for a period of another one year. The services of the petitioners have been regularized vide order dated 13.08.2002. When after the expiry of two years, the services of the petitioners have not been extended, the petitioners filed writ petitions, in which the interim order has been granted on 09.02.1999 and the petitioners have been allowed to continue. The said writ petitions have been disposed of vide order dated 18.05.1999 with the direction to the respondents to continue the petitioners on adhoc basis till the regularly selected and appropriate candidates join the post. It is further observed that this arrangement shall not create any right in favour of the petitioners. They will not be entitled to claim any lien on the post. In pursuance of the interim and final order passed by this Court in the aforesaid writ petitions, the petitioners have been allowed to continue and subsequently, their services have been regularized on 13.08.2002. However, since the services of the petitioners have not been extended, the petitioners could not work for the period 21.11.1998 to 18.02.1999. For the aforesaid period, the petitioners claimed salary, which has been denied.