1. Heard Mr. S. Jayenta Singh, learned Sr. Advocate along with Mr. O. Kiranjit Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Mr. Th. Ibohal Singh, learned G.A. for the respondents. 2. A prayer has been made for issuance of appropriate writ or direction to the respondents to regularize the service of the petitioner as 'Headmaster' of Junior High School in the Department of Education (Schools), Manipur. 3. The facts emanating from the pleadings in the writ petition are that the petitioner holder of B.A. and B.Ed. degree was approved as 'Headmaster' of Aided Modern Junior Basic School (in short called 'School') w.e.f. 1.10.1970 by an order dated 18.5.1971 of the Dy. Inspector of Schools (IE), Deptt. Of Education(S), Manipur. Subsequently after taking over the said 'School' by the State Government the petitioner was absorbed in the said school w.e.f.1.4.1978 and had started working as 'Headmaster' of School w.e.f. 3.9.1982 by an order dated 8.11.1982 of the Joint Secretary of Education, Govt.of Manipur. 4. For such absorption, the petitioner was being given salary of 'Headmaster' of Junior Basic School/Graduate Teacher w.e.f. 1.1.1986 under the Manipur Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1990. It appears that the said Modern Junior Basic School was upgraded to Modern Junior High School (in short upgraded 'School') and as such the petitioner was promoted as 'Headmaster' in-charge of 'School.' 5. The petitioner along with other similarly situated persons filed a writ petition (C.R.No.946 of 1989) for the direction to the state respondents to give them the pay scale, status and all other benefits of the 'Headmaster' of the upgraded 'Schools'. The said writ petition/civil rule was disposed of by order dated 11.9.1990 of this High Court with direction to the state and its authorities to give the writ petitioners the pay scale, status and all other benefits from the date the 'School' was upgraded. The operative portion of the said order dated 11.9.1990 is reproduced herein as below: “The short question in this writ petition is whether the Headmasters of the UJB Schools now upgraded as Junior High Schools are entitled to get the pay scale and status enjoyed by the Headmasters of the existing Junior High Schools. The operative portion of the said order dated 11.9.1990 is reproduced herein as below: “The short question in this writ petition is whether the Headmasters of the UJB Schools now upgraded as Junior High Schools are entitled to get the pay scale and status enjoyed by the Headmasters of the existing Junior High Schools. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the writ petition, we find no justification for not giving the benefit to the Headmasters now working as Headmasters of the Junior High Schools upgraded by the Government order. Accordingly, we direct the respondents to give the pay scale; status and all the benefits to the Headmasters of the upgraded Junior High Schools with effect from the date of the schools were upgraded.: 6. The review petition (Civil Review No.45 of 1992) said to have been filed in the order dated 11.9.1990 was dismissed on 15.3.1995 by this court, thereafter the petitioner was promoted as 'Headmaster' of upgraded 'School' on ad hoc basis w.e.f.19.8.1982 and as such he has been working. It appears, in the meantime, the state government by an office memorandum dated 9.10.1992 issued by the Commissioner (DP), Department of Personnel & Administrative Reforms (Personnel Division) provided that the ad hoc services of Classes-I, II, III and IV who have worked at least for 5(five) years as on 1.9.1992 shall have to be considered for regularization subject to the fulfilling of the conditions indicated therein. On the strength of the order dated 11.9.1990 of this court and in the light of the office memorandum dated 9.10.1992, petitioner is claiming for being considered for regularization to the post of 'Headmaster' of Modern Junior High School. 7. On the other hand, the learned state counsel not in a position to controvert the factual aspects averred in the petition and to indicate about the availability of post in the absence of the counter affidavit by saying that the office memorandum was a temporary scheme and has invited the attention of this court by referring to para-4 of the office memorandum in question dated 9.10.1992. For convenience, paragraph-4 of the said office memorandum dated 9.10.1992 is quoted as below: “4. The regularization of such ad hoc/officiating employees will be ONE TIME and should be completed on or before 31.3.1993 and NO RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT WILL BE ALLOWED. For convenience, paragraph-4 of the said office memorandum dated 9.10.1992 is quoted as below: “4. The regularization of such ad hoc/officiating employees will be ONE TIME and should be completed on or before 31.3.1993 and NO RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT WILL BE ALLOWED. In the case on those cases which cannot be completed on or before 31.3.1993, such cases should be considered according to the normal procedure.: 8. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the documents. Since, the petitioner was appointed initially in Aided Modern Junior Basic School which was upgraded to Modern Junior High School and petitioner was allowed to work as in-charge Headmaster in the upgraded school and was also given promotion on ad hoc basis and as such working as 'Headmaster' for more than 2(two) decades. On the strength of this court's order dated 11.9.1990 passed in C.R.No.946 of 1989, petitioner was given the pay scale, status and all other benefits of Headmaster of upgraded Junior High School with effect from the date the said school was upgraded. Since the petitioner has rendered long service without any blemish, therefore, his experience, has to be properly acknowledged. In reference to the office memorandum dated 9.10.192, or in sequence thereof, if any, official memorandum of regularization or the scheme of regularization is available, in the State, the petitioner is entitled to be considered under those provisions/schemes/norms by the Commissioner/Secretary of Education(S), Govt. of Manipur within three months from receipt of the certified copy of this order. 9. With the above observations and direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.