Judgment 1. This application has been filed for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to regularise the services of the members of the petitioners Union on completion of five years service. 2. Shorn of unnecessary details, facts giving rise to the present application are that the petitioner is a registered Union of the employees of the Irrigation Department of the State Government. It is its stand that Gauge Readers were appointed on daily wages in work charge establishment from time to time and by resolution dated 22.12.80 (Annexure-1), State Government had decided to regularise the services of those employees working in the work charge establishment continuously on completion of five years after 1.4.77 but by orders dated 8.10.91 (Annexure-3) and 30.9.92 (Annexure-4), services of the Gauge Readers have been regularised with effect from 22.10.84, although they had completed the term of five years prior to the said date. 3. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents, in which respondents have stated that decision to regularise the service of the Gauge Readers with effect from 22.10.84 was taken by order dated 8.10.91 and 30.9.92 and this writ application having been filed on 1.8.2001, same deserves to be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches. It has also been pointed out that by resolution of the State Government dated 23.10.87 (Annexure-2) all those employees who have put in satisfactory service for five years on 21.10.84 were to be regularised and in pursuance thereof members of the petitioners association have been regularised with effect from 22.10.84. 4. Mrs. Anjana Mishra appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that in view of the resolution of the State Government dated 22.12.80 (Annexure-1) the services of employees of the work-charge establishment were to be regularised on completion of five years and hence regularisation of the services of Gauge Readers from 22.10.84 is illegal. J.C. to G.R IX, however, submits that according the resolution, referred to above, five years experience is required to be completed after 1.4.77 and according to the resolution itself services were to be regularised on availability of regular vacancy and in that view of the matter Gauge Readers did not had the right for regularisation of their services on completion of five years period. 5. Having appreciated the rival submission, I do not find any substance in the submission of Mrs. Mishra. 5. Having appreciated the rival submission, I do not find any substance in the submission of Mrs. Mishra. From the resolution of the State Government, referred to above, an employee in the work charge establishment was required to complete five years service prior to 1.4.77 and services were to be regularised on availability of vacancy. However, later on by resolution dated 23.10.87 (Annexure-2) the State Government decided to regularise the services on completion of five years upto 21.10.84 and accordingly the services of the Gauge Readers have been regularised with effect from 22.10.84.I do not find any error in the same. 6. I also find substance in the plea of the respondents that this writ application suffers from delay and laches. As stated earlier, the services of Gauge Readers were regularised with effect from 22.10.84 by order dated 8.10.91 (Annexure-3) and 30.9.92 (Annexure-4), this writ application has been preferred on 1.8.2001. In case the date of regularisation of the services of the Gauge Readers is shifted, that will having a bearing on the finance of the State. At such a distance of time, relief sought for by the petitioner is not fit to be granted on the ground of delay and laches. 7. I do not find any merit in this application and it is dismissed accordingly.