Ajit Singh; CJ.:-- 1. This intra court appeal by the State Government is directed against the order dated 10.3.2011 passed by the learned Single Judge of this High Court whereby he has allowed Respondents’ WP(C) No. 5286/2004. 2. In 1993 and 1994, thousands of Assistant Teachers were appointed in various Middle English Schools without there being sanctioned posts. Large number of such appointments were made without any selection and some were made after selection. But whether the procedure of selection was in accordance with the rules is really not known. Also, though the Assistant Teachers, after their appointments, joined their respective schools and worked there for many years, they were not paid any salary. This resulted into chaos like situation in the State. The aggrieved teachers approached the Court for a direction against the State Government to regularize their services and also for payment of salary. The matter was eventually taken up by the Manohoran Committee which had been entrusted with the duty to inquire into the appointments of teachers all over the State. The Committee in its report categorized the appointments of Assistant Teachers made after selection procedure as irregular irrespective of the fact that those appointments were against non-sanctioned posts. Having regard to the report of the Committee, a Cabinet decision was taken by the State Government to regularize the services of Assistant Teachers, whose appointments were irregular, on a condition that they will not claim arrears of salary of their past services. On the agreement of this condition, Assistant Teachers, whose appointments were categorized as irregular, were made regular from the month of August, 2005. 3. Later, some such Assistant Teachers filed WP(C) No. 5705/2010 and claimed arrears of salary for the period they had worked prior to the date of their regularization. A learned Single Judge of this Court, after hearing the petitioners therein dismissed the petition on merits by a reasoned order dated 3.11.2010. 4. It is to be noted that the respondents for the same relief had also filed WP(C) No. 5286/2004 which came up for hearing on 10.3.2011 before another learned Single Judge. And sadly, neither the respondents nor the State brought to the notice of learned Single Judge about the abovementioned order dated 3.11.2010 passed in WP(C) No. 5705/2010.
4. It is to be noted that the respondents for the same relief had also filed WP(C) No. 5286/2004 which came up for hearing on 10.3.2011 before another learned Single Judge. And sadly, neither the respondents nor the State brought to the notice of learned Single Judge about the abovementioned order dated 3.11.2010 passed in WP(C) No. 5705/2010. The learned Single Judge oblivious of the view taken in order dated 3.11.2010 by taking a diametrically opposite view, has allowed the writ petition of respondents with a direction to the State Government to pay them arrears of salary for the entire period they had worked prior to the date of their regularization. It is also pertinent to note that order dated 3.11.2010 was challenged by the petitioners in WA No. 326/2011 and the Division Bench vide order dated 25.2.2015 dismissed the appeal. Order dated 3.11.2010 thus stands confirmed by a Division Bench. 5. As seen above, during the course of hearing, the learned Single Judge was not informed by the respective counsel for the parties about the order dated 3.11.2010 which has resulted into an anomalous situation. We, accordingly, finally disposed of this appeal with liberty to the appellant to file a Review Petition informing the learned Single Judge of order dated 3.11.2010 passed in WP(C) No. 5705/2010 which was also confirmed by a Division Bench in WA 326/2011 vide order dated 25.2.2015. We also make it clear that till such Review Petition is decided, interim order of this Court directing the parties to maintain status quo shall continue.