JUDGMENT Ritu Bahri, J. - As per Annexure P-1, the petitioner has been working as part time Class-IV employee with Education Department, Haryana, since 22.09.1993. Thereafter, he has been regularized w.e.f. 08.08.2014. However, some of the persons, junior to petitioner, have been regularized w.e.f. 27.09.2003. Keeping in view that case of the petitioner remained pending for regularization for almost 18 years, benefit of Regularization Policy of 2003 has been extended to the petitioner on 08.08.2014. 2. Notice of motion. 3. At this stage, Mr.Lokesh Singhal, Addl. A.G., Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State and informs that regularization is done on the availability of sanctioned posts. 4. In order to remove the agony of the employees, who are working on ad hoc/work charged/part time etc, for the last more than 20 to 25 years, the State Government can consider for creation of a diminishing cadre separately and regularize them immediately so that necessary benefit, after regularization, can be enjoyed by them. 5. As per judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ram Lal Wadhwa and another v. State of Haryana and others 1972 AIR (SC) 1982 , wherein 1961 Rules creating two separate cadres for teachers were held not to be arbitrary or not violating the Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. One cadre for Local Bodies Schools and other for Government Schools. The teachers of Local Bodies Schools falls under diminishing character of provincialised cadre governed by District Board Rules. It was held that the decision of the Government to frame 1961 Rules only to keep State cadre and there being no arbitrary treatment among teachers of provincialised cadre and no infringement of Articles 14 and 16. The teachers worked as provincialised cadre post in the diminishing cadre would get abolished once they retired. 6. Keeping in view the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court, the State Government can consider for creating a diminishing cadre separately and regularized these employees who have to be given parity equally to the counterparts who have been regularized on availability of regularized sanctioned post. Creation of diminishing cadre will not create any financial burden on the State as State is bound to regularize their services on the ground of parity as per judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Malathi Das (Retd.) Now P.B. Mahishy & Ors. Creation of diminishing cadre will not create any financial burden on the State as State is bound to regularize their services on the ground of parity as per judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Malathi Das (Retd.) Now P.B. Mahishy & Ors. v. Suresh & Ors., (2014) 13 SCC 249 wherein, it is held that regularization should be done on the principle of parity and similar placed employees who have been regularized. In the present case, similar cases of those employees, who are covered under 2003 policy, are still constrained to approach this Court for appropriate relief under the regularization policies 11.11.2003 and 27.02.2004. 7. Adjourned to 08.08.2018.