A. K. YOG, J. ( 1 ) ADMITTEDLY, petitioner Shri Ram Briksha Chaudhari, was appointed by the Principal, Maharani laxmi Bai Medical College, Jhansi as is evident from perusal of his appointment letter dated 22nd February, 1995 (Annexure 1 to the Writ Petition ). There is no averment that the post was ever advertised. From the record of the petition it is evident that the Petitioner was appointed without adopting prescribed procedure for making appointment. ( 2 ) MOREOVER, there is no averment nor any material on record to show that Petitioner, who did not possess requisite training of Lab Technician, was appointed under constraints of non-availability of a qualified candidate. " It is queer to note that no effort was made to advertise the post and selected best available candidate at that time. Petitioner alleges that he was not permitted to complete requisite training in pursuance to the condition contained in the aforesaid appointment letter (Annexure 1 to the Writ Petition) and in its support he has filed two documents (Annexures 4 and 5 to the petition) wherefrom it appears that Petitioner applied to the director General for according permission to him for obtaining requisite Lab Technician training. The Principal appears to have recommended the same vide letter dated 15th June, 1996 (Annexure 5 to the Writ Petition ). What action was taken by the Petitioner when requisite permission was not accorded by the Direction General, Medical Education and Training, is a matter of guess work in absence of requisite pleadings and cannot be decided as necessary requisite pleadings are wanted in this case. Petitioner has not filed relevant material indicating the minimum qualification required for the post of Lab Technician nor he has filed copy of the requisite rules permitting in service training and/or otherwise permitting a candidate to be appointed as Lab Technician without possessing requisite training/qualification. ( 3 ) A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of Respondent No. 1. In Para 3 of the counter-affidavit it is stated that Petitioner did not complete training of Lab Technician even though he had full opportunity to do so uptil 31st January, 1997 from the averments made in the counter-affidavit. From the averments made in the counter-affidavit this Court comes to the conclusion that Petitioner was not serious to complete Lab Technician Training. From the averments made in the counter-affidavit this Court comes to the conclusion that Petitioner was not serious to complete Lab Technician Training. ( 4 ) BE that as it may be, the initial appointment of the Petitioner being arbitrary and absolutely illegal, he is not entitled to any relief claimed under Article 226. Constitution of India, which is an extraordinary discretionary remedy. This Court has no hesitation in recording that Petitioner succeeded in obtaining appointment by using extraordinary means on the dictates of Director general, Medical Education and Training and completely bye-passing the regular procedure of selection for the post in question. ( 5 ) INTERIM order dated 12th December 1997 is discharged. ( 6 ) IT is made clear that though it is a fit case where Petitioner should be required to reimburse entire salary paid under interim order of this Court, but for the fact that he was said entire amount by way of salary under interim order dated 12th December, 1997, which was passed in absence of the counter-affidavit. This Court cannot ignore the fact that Petitioner is not alone responsible for obtaining an illegal appointment and also other responsible person holding the post that of Director General, Medical Education and Training and Principal of Maharani Laxmi bai Medical College, Jhansi are also involved, it will not be expedient to punish the Petitioner alone particularly when he has rendered services involving physical volition. It is, however, a fit case where a certified copy of this judgment be sent to the Chief Secretary, Government of Uttar pradesh. Lucknow for taking necessary action, after holding necessary enquiry, and suitable action may be taken as may be advised and deemed proper in the facts of the case. .