Heard Mr.N.Jotendro, learned counsel for the petitioner as well a Mr.A.Jagatchandra, learned senior Government Advocate appearing for respondent nos.1 and 2. [2] From the record, it appears that respondents had already been granted sufficient time to file their affidavit-in-opposition. But till date they fail to file affidavit-in-opposition. From the order of this court dated 3.6.2006 it is clear that two weeks' time was granted as a last chance to the respondents to file their affidavit-in-opposition. [3] Having no alternative, this writ petition is taken up for disposal at this stage on the materials available on record. [4] The petitioners (two in numbers) were initially appointed as Extension Educators on ad hoc basis for a period of 2 (two) months and 5 (five) months respectively vide order of the Addl.Director i/c, Family Welfare Services, Manipur being No.49/FW/78-(Pt.1) dated 3.12.1991 and No.160/FW/82(Pt) dated 28.9.1991. It is said that in pursuance of the said appointment orders dated 3.12.91 and 28.9.1991 they had joined as Extension Educators in the Directorate of State Family Welfare Bureau, Manipur. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners had earlier approached this court by filing writ petition being WP© No.391 of 2002 for challenging the order dated 5.3.2002 for terminating their services and also for a direction to the respondents to consider their cases for regularization. This court by passing final judgment and order dated 18.3.2004 had disposed of the writ petition © No.391 of 2002 with the observation and direction that: “In view of the above stand of the state respondents as well as the materials on record, I dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the state respondents, more particularly respondent no.2, Director, Family Welfare, Manipur, to take appropriate steps for considering the cases of the petitioners for regularization of their services in terms of the office memorandum dated 22.8.94 and as directed by this court in Writ Appeal No.107 and 108 of 2001. As the services of the petitioners had been terminated principally on the ground that they had not been found fit to be regularized by the screening committee, the impugned order, in view of the above cannot be sustained. It is, therefore, quashed. As the services of the petitioners had been terminated principally on the ground that they had not been found fit to be regularized by the screening committee, the impugned order, in view of the above cannot be sustained. It is, therefore, quashed. No costs.” [5] In pursuance of the order of this court dated 18.3.2004 passed in WP© No.391 of 2002, the Director, Family Welfare, Department, as part compliance of the order of this court dated 18.3.2004 issued order being No.34/1/DP-FW/92 dated 7.7.2004 for reinstating the petitioners as Executive Educators. For easy reference, order of the Director, Family Welfare Department, and Manipur dated 7.7.2004 is quoted hereunder: “No.34/1/DP-FW/92: Whereas, Shri N.Brojen Singh and Smt.K.Ibetombi Devi were appointed as Extension Educators on substitute/ad hoc basis in Family Welfare Department, Manipur vide order No.49/III/EL/Gr-III/SFWB/91 dated 3.12.1991 and No.160/FW/82 (Pt) dated 28.9.1991 respectively w.e.f. the dates they joined duty. 2. Whereas, the substitute/adhoc services of Shri N.Brojen Singh and Smt.K.Ibetombi Devi were terminated w.e.f. 5.3.2002 vide order No.34/1/DP-FW/92(Pt) dated 5.3.2002 on the recommendation of the Screening Committee held on 2.3.2002 and in pursuance of Govt.of Manipur Secretariat: Family Welfare Department's letter No.11/6/2001-M(FW) dated 5.3.2002. 3. Whereas, Shri N.Brojen Singh and Smt.K.Ibetombi Devi preferred an appeal before the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court, Imphal Bench, Imphal by filing a case under Writ Petition © No.391 of 2002. The Hon'ble High Court while disposing the said case passed a judgment and order on 18.3.2004 directing the State respondents to take appropriate steps for considering the cases of the petitioners Shri N.Brojen Singh and Smt.K.Ibetombi Devi for regularization of t heir services in terms of the office Memorandum dated 22.8.1994 and as directed by the Hon'ble Court in Writ Appeal No.107 and 108 of 2001 and quashed the aforementioned termination order of even No.dated 5th March, 2002 with no cost. 4. Whereas, under this Directorate's letter of even number dated 27th April, 2004 a clarification was sought from the Government of Manipur in the regard. The Government of Manipur has conveyed approval for revocation of the termination orders dated 5.3.2002 in respect of N.Brojen Singh and Smt.K.Ibetombi Devi in compliance of Court's orders dated 18.3.2004 under WP© No.391 of 2002 vide letter No.11/6/2001-M (FW) dated the 11th June 2004. 5. The Government of Manipur has conveyed approval for revocation of the termination orders dated 5.3.2002 in respect of N.Brojen Singh and Smt.K.Ibetombi Devi in compliance of Court's orders dated 18.3.2004 under WP© No.391 of 2002 vide letter No.11/6/2001-M (FW) dated the 11th June 2004. 5. Now, therefore, in pursuance of the Secretariat: Family Welfare Department's letter No.11/6/2001-M (FW) dated 11th June 2004 the order dated 5.3.2002 is hereby revoked with immediate effect.” [6] The only grievance of the petitioners is that the respondents in compliance of the judgment and order of this court dated 18.3.2004 passed in WP© No.391 of 2002, i.e. the State respondents, more particularly, respondent no.2, Director, Family Welfare has failed to take up appropriate steps for considering the case of petitioners for regularization of their services in terms of the office memorandum dated 22.8.1994 for the simple reason that this court while passing the judgment and order had not fixed the period for implementation of the judgment and order dated 18.3.2004. [7] In view of the above discussion, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the State respondents, more particularly, respondent no.2, Director, Family Welfare, Manipur to take up appropriate steps for considering the case of the petitioners for regularization of their services in terms of the office memorandum dated 22.8.1994 as ordered earlier by this Court in the judgment and order dated 18.3.2004 passed in WP© No.391 of 2002 within a period of 4 (four) months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment and order.. With the above observation and direction, writ petition is disposed of.