ORDER (Oral) (Hon’ble Mr. Jasbir S. Dhaliwal, Member (J) - Applicant, Smt. Jamna Devi, pleads that she was engaged as part time Safai Karamchari w.e.f. 24.11.87 and with effect from 6.5.88 she was engaged on daily wages basis. This arrangement, however, came to be terminated in the year 1988 itself. Thereafter, she was made to work at times on daily wage basis and other part time basis from time to time (Ann. A/1). She continued to work with the. Respondent Department till the date her services were terminated} once again by verbal orders w.e.f. 20.6.1995. She filed CWP in the Honble High Court of Himachal Pradesh and under interim direction she was ordered to be reinstated though the writ petition came to be dismissed in the year 1997. She has been making representations to the Respondent Department for considering her for regularisation of her services but without any result (Annexure A/2). Mentioning other facts, she has prayed for a direction to the respondents that she be considered for regularization and consequential benefits on the basis off length of her service, the fictional breaks from time to time in her case be dispensed with and she be considered for equal pay for equal work. She seeks further direction to the respondents that she be given work on daily wage basis instead of part time basis. 2. Respondents through their detailed reply plead that at present there is no proposal to fill up vacant Group D posts by direct recruitment. These posts are first filled from amongst the surplus staff sponsored by the special cell of the Director General, Employment and Training and incase there is no surplus candidate available with them only then such vacancies can be filled through Employment Exchange. They deny that the applicant was engaged on daily wage basis, but admit that she has been working on part time basis though on some occasions work on daily wage basis was also taken from her. She has worked for about 3 months in the year 1988 and for about two months in the year 1990 on daily wage basis. They, however, admit that thereafter she has been continuously working as a part time worker till date and they have never given any notional breaks. She has been allowed to work under the directions of Honble High Court though the writ petition was dismissed on 22.9.1997. They, however, admit that thereafter she has been continuously working as a part time worker till date and they have never given any notional breaks. She has been allowed to work under the directions of Honble High Court though the writ petition was dismissed on 22.9.1997. They plead that her services on the basis of her long service cannot be regularized. She was, however, called for interview for the post of Chowkidar fixed for 7.8.1998 alongwith other candidates in view of directions given by Central Administrative Tribunal dated 5.6.1997 in OA No. 1032/HP/96 in which some persons similarly placed like the applicant had come to the Tribunal. She was, however, not found -fit for the post of Chowkidar. They, however, have come out with a very clear plea that as and when recruitment to the vacant post of Group D is made in the Respondent- Department and if applicant applies, she will be considered according to the relevant rules, after being called for interview. 3. No rejoinder has been filed. 4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 5. We have not been shown any scheme or Rules under which applicant may be covered for grant of regularization or any other benefit on the basis of length of service rendered by her in the Respondent-Department. We are, however, of the opinion that long service rendered by her cannot be altogether ignored or overlooked as and when she is to be considered for appointment to the Group D post. Respondents have mentioned in the written reply that they have not given any notional break and will not give such break unless no work in available at all. In the facts and circumstances of this case, we also cannot give a direction to the respondents to give work to her on daily wage basis instead of part time basis as claimed by her. However, her prayer for being considered for regularization is not without basis, particularly, when we find that respondents also recognized the fact that she has rendered long service under them. 6. In these circumstances, we dispose of the present O.A. with a direction to the respondents to consider her also alongwith other candidates, if she applies, whenever recruitment to Group D post is under taken by the Respondent- Department. 6. In these circumstances, we dispose of the present O.A. with a direction to the respondents to consider her also alongwith other candidates, if she applies, whenever recruitment to Group D post is under taken by the Respondent- Department. They shall consider her on the basis of her application notwithstanding whether her name has been sponsored by Employment Exchange or not. While considering her case, respondents should give weightage to the service already rendered by her and in case she is found to be over-age, they should also, consider relaxation of age in her case by considering the number of years of service put in by her. No order as to costs. -