(1) DELAY condoned. (2) SPECIAL leave granted. Office report says that the notice issued to respondents 5 to 7 have not yet been returned nor the A/D cards. Taking into consideration the time taken hitherto, we declare that the service is sufficient. (3) SMT. Vimla Sharma was a primary school teacher but with effect from August 1973 she was posted in the Junior High School for teaching Geography. By communication dated 10/11/1975, Regional Inspectress of Girls School recommended her case for regular appoint- ment but unfortunately no action has been taken by the management. On the contrary, somebody is sought to be appointed displacing her. At that stage, she approached the High court by way of writ petition under Article 226 for relief. The High court dismissed the writ petition on the ground of laches. (4) WE have examined the case and perused the material on record. We are of the opinion that the High court appears to be in error in dis- missing the petition for laches. It is true that the case of the petitioner was recommended for regular appointment by the competent authority i.e. Regional Inspectress of Girls School as far back on 10/11/1975. Although the management did not make an order in her favour, the work has been extracted from her. She has been continued as teacher in the Junior High School all through, it would be, therefore, dis- criminatory and unjust to deny her the pay of the post and regular appointment. (5) IN the circumstances, we direct the management to appoint the petitioner as a regular teacher in Geography in the Junior High School in question and direct the management and department to pay the salary of the post for the entire period in question. Payment shall be made by adjusting the amount, if any paid hitherto, within two months from today. Appeal is disposed of accordingly with the direction as indicated. (6) IN the circumstances, we make no order as to costs.