Learned Brief Holder for the State submits that the petitioners of the earlier Writ Petition 1322/2003 S S had already been given appointment in companypliance of the order dated 26.10.2004.
1322/2003 S S which was decided by the Court per judgment dated 26.10.2004 and the State instead of preferring Special Appeal before the Division Bench went up in S.L.P. before the Honble Supreme Court S.L.P. Civil No.
Intra court appeals preferred thereagainst were dismissed by the High Court opining that this Court had issued limited numberice in the special leave petitions filed thereagainst.
6609 of 2001 S S Vijay Kumar Joshi others Vs.
Following the said judgment, other writ petitions were also allowed by an order dated 6.06.2005, numbericing Learned Counsel for the petitioners has filed the companyy of the judgment passed in Civil Writ Petition No.
The said orders were issued with the companysultation and approval of the Personnel Department.
The case of Vijay Kumar Joshi, respondent No.
It was held Similar companytroversy was involved in earlier Civil Writ Petition No.
1 and 2 i.e. Director, Training and Employment, Government of U.P., Lucknow, in the State of Uttaranchal to give appointment to the petitioners in suitable post in companypliance of the Government Orders dated 30.12.1995 and 26.02.1996 with full salary w.e.f.
6451 of 2005 who was appointed in the month of January, 1980 and Vijay Kumar Joshi, respondent No.
8239 of 2005 who was appointed on 1.07.1983 they were absorbed in the services of the State on 14.12.2005 , other respondents herein were appointed after the cut off date provided for in the Rules, viz.,
8239 of 2005 was decided first wherein having regard to the fact that he was appointed prior to the cut off date, his writ petition was allowed by an order dated 03.11.2004.
6451/2005 was registered and by order dated 7.3.2005 the Honble Judges of the Apex Court admitted the S.L.P. only on the point of direction of payment of back wages to that petitioner.
1 in Civil Appeal arising out of SLP C No.
As despite framing of the aforementioned rules and issuance of the aforementioned circulars, respondents had number been absorbed in the services of the State, they filed writ applications before the High Court of Uttaranchal.
State of Uttar Pradesh others and has submitted that this Court has allowed the writ petition of certain other retrenched employees with the directions that the State of Uttar Pradesh and the companynter part of respondent No.
1 in the Civil Appeal arising out of SLP C No.
Admittedly, except Karan Pal, respondent No.
1 in Civil Appeal arising out of SLP C No.
B. SINHA, J Leave granted.
1st April, 1996.
There can be numbercontroversy that the respondent petitioners shall also be placed on same footing by the State in regard to the companypliance to the direction of the Court regarding appointment as companytained in the impugned judgment dated 6.6.2005 and the respondent petitioners have to be given appointment in the establishments of the State as observed in the judgment under appeal.
