JUDGMENT : Pramath Patnaik, J. In the captioned writ application, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for direction upon the respondents to regularize/absorb the services of the petitioner against Grade III post in Millate College, Parsa (Godda) and for direction upon the respondents to grant and pay the current and the arrears of salary to the petitioner since 30.11.1987. 2. The factual exposition, as has been delineated, in the writ application, is that in pursuance to the advertisement no. 3/1987 dated 15.09.1987, inviting applications for several posts including the post of Office Clerk in various department of Millat College, Parsa, the petitioner applied for and after going through the selection process, he was selected on the said post, as evident from expert report dated 07.11.1987. It has further been averred that pursuant to his selection he gave his joining on the post of Clerk vide letter dated 20.11.1987 and his services was confirmed by the Governing Body of the college in its meeting dated 24.12.1987 w.e.f 30.11.1987. By passage of time, vide notification dated 05.09.1988, the management and control of Millat College, Parsa was converted in the constituent college of Bhagalpur University and was taken over w.e.f 30.08.1988. Pursuant thereto, the Bhagalpur University vide letter dated 28.08.1990 addressed to Deputy Director, H.R.D Department, Government of Bihar sent a list of teaching and non-teaching staffs, wherein the name of the petitioner finds place in the list of non-teaching staff (Grade III) who are not getting the salary. 3. It has further been averred that though the petitioner has been working since his joining i.e. w.e.f 30.11.1987 but his name did not find place in the report of Agrawal Commission. In the writ application, it has further been averred that Registrar, Sido Kanhu Murmu University, Dumka vide his letter dated 24.01.2006 also granted permission to the petitioner to work as daily wages employee on Grade III post in the aforesaid Millat College, Parsa. But, in spite of the said fact, the services of the petitioner was terminated by the Principal of the said college vide letter 20.11.2006 in pursuance of general office order dated 18.11.2006 issued by the Registrar, Sido Kanhu Murmu University, Dumka. 4. Heard Mr. J.P. Jha, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Afaque Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner; Ms. Amrita Kumari, A.C to learned Sr. S.C. I and Mr. Mithilesh Singh, learned counsel for the respondents-University. 5. 4. Heard Mr. J.P. Jha, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Afaque Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner; Ms. Amrita Kumari, A.C to learned Sr. S.C. I and Mr. Mithilesh Singh, learned counsel for the respondents-University. 5. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner at the very outset submitted that in view of the liberty given in order dated 31.08.2017 in Civil Appeal No. 2703 of 2017, which was passed by taking into account the report submitted by Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.B. Sinha (retired) before Hon'ble Apex Court, the petitioner has approached this Court. It has further been submitted that in the said order it has categorically been mentioned where recommendations have not been made, the Hon'ble Apex Court has not gone into the merit of the case and they are left open to be decided. 6. On merit of the case, learned senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner's service ought to be absorbed/regularized by the University in view of the fact that the petitioner has been continuously working against the vacant and sanctioned Grade III post in Millat College, Parsa; hence petitioner is entitled to get arrears of salary as well as current salary. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the University, after the final order passed in Civil Appeal No. 6098 of 1997 with analogous cases, has issued notification vide memo dated 07.11.2006, keeping in view the long services of the teachers working in the aforesaid college, and absorbed the services of eight teachers, but the services of the petitioner has not been regularized/absorbed in an arbitrary manner. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submitted with vehemence that the University itself is empowered to absorb the petitioner under Section 4(1)(14) of the Jharkhand State Universities Act, 2000 but due to inaction on the part of the respondent-University, petitioner's services are not being absorbed/regularized. 7. Controverting the averments made in the writ application, learned counsel for the respondents-State of Jharkhand submitted that for surreptitious entry of employees in the colleges, a vigilance enquiry was set up. 7. Controverting the averments made in the writ application, learned counsel for the respondents-State of Jharkhand submitted that for surreptitious entry of employees in the colleges, a vigilance enquiry was set up. In the meantime, apprehending their termination, the employees formed an Union and moved the Hon'ble High Court by filing C.W.J.C No. 4021 of 1995, which was disposed of vide order dated 31.01.1997 directing the concerned universities to take steps under sub-Section (14) of Section 4 of the Bihar Universities Act, 1976 in respect of regularization of the services of the teachers of the colleges, which were made constituent in the 4th phase. Aggrieved thereof, the State of Bihar moved before Hon'ble Apex Court by filing Civil Appeal No. 6098 of 1997, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court constituted a one man committee of Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.C. Agarwal, retired Judge of Hon'ble Supreme Court, who conducted enquiry and submitted its report before the Hon'ble Apex Court and the Hon'ble Court accepted the report of the commission. It has emphatically been submitted that the Hon'ble Agarwal Commission has not included the name of the petitioner in Annexure-IVB of its report meaning thereby the Commission has not found the services of the petitioner fit to be absorbed in University services. Learned counsel for the respondents-State submitted that since report has been accepted by Hon'ble Apex Court and all objections filed against the report has been rejected, there is no question of regularization/absorption of services of the petitioner. 8. Supplementing the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the respondents-State, learned counsel for the respondents-University submitted that the absorption/regularization of teaching and non-teaching employees in the 4th phase Constituent college, which includes the college in which the petitioner was stated to be working, is governed by the direction given in the case of State of Bihar & Ors Vs. Bihar Rajya M.S.E.S.K.K Mahasangh & Ors as reported in (2005) 9 SCC 129 , which is based on the report of Justice Agarwal Commission. Furthermore, the petitioner at paragraph 11 of the writ application has categorically stated that his name has not found place in the report of Agarwal Commission; as such till date the petitioner's service has not been regularized/absorbed. Furthermore, the petitioner at paragraph 11 of the writ application has categorically stated that his name has not found place in the report of Agarwal Commission; as such till date the petitioner's service has not been regularized/absorbed. It has further been stated that during pendency of the instant writ application, the petitioner had also approached the subsequent Commission headed by Justice S.B. Sinha, which also dismissed the claim of the petitioner for absorption/regularization. Hence, the petitioner cannot be allowed to reopen the issue of regularization/absorption now. 9. Having heard learned counsel for the parties at length and on perusal of the record, I am of the considered view that the petitioner has not been able to make out a case for interference for the following facts, reasons and judicial pronouncements: (I).In the year 1986, the unified State of Bihar took a decision to convert 40 affiliated colleges into Constituent Units in 4th Phase, which includes Millat College, Parsa where the petitioner is alleged to have been working. But complaints were received regarding surreptitious entry of some employees in connivance with Governing Bodies of said college, by making manipulation in the records of the University, which necessitated State Government to set up a vigilance enquiry. In the meantime, the Union of the aggrieved employees knocked the door of writ Court by filing C.W.J.C No. 4021 of 1995 which was disposed of vide order dated 31.01.1997 directing the concerned Universities to take steps under sub-section (14) of Section 4 of the Bihar Universities Act in respect of regularization of services of the employee, which were made constituent in the 4th phase. Aggrieved thereof, the State moved before Hon'ble Apex Court by filing Civil Appeal No. 6098 of 1997, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court constituted a one man committee of Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.C. Agarwal (retired Judge of Hon'ble Supreme Court) for making a detailed enquiry with specific reference. In the light of terms of reference, the Commission submitted its report before Hon'ble Supreme Court mentioning therein list of sanctioned posts and recommended posts and also submitted the list of non-teaching staff, who were considered illegible for absorption in service of University at Annexure IV B of the report of Commission. Basing on such report, the Hon'ble Apex Court passed the final order dated 12.10.2004 accepting the report of the Commission and rejecting all the objections raised against the said report. Basing on such report, the Hon'ble Apex Court passed the final order dated 12.10.2004 accepting the report of the Commission and rejecting all the objections raised against the said report. (ii).From the pleadings available on record, it appears that cut-off date for college was 30.04.1986 and after that the Governing Body of the college had no authority to appoint any employee in the college; therefore, the so-called appointment of the petitioner was declared ab initio illegal as his so-called appointment was made after the said cut-off date. (iii).On perusal of record, it further appears that after considering the availability of posts and validity of appointments, the Hon'ble Agarwal Commission has not included the name of the petitioner in Annexure-IVB of its report meaning thereby it has not found the services of the petitioner fit to be absorbed in University service. (iv).Furthermore, during pendency of the instant writ application, the petitioner had also approached the subsequent Commission headed by Justice S.B. Sinha, which was formed in the light of order dated 22.01.2013 passed in S.L.P (Civil) No. 12591 of 2010, whereby one man commission was again appointed for absorption in constituent colleges on the anvil of Justice Agarwal Commission report dated 10.12.2001 and the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of 'State of Bihar & Ors Vs. Bihar Rajya M.S.E.S.K.K Mahasangh & Ors, but, the Justice S.B. Sinha Commission dismissed the claim of the petitioner for absorption/regularization. Hence, the petitioner cannot be allowed to reopen the issue of regularization/absorption now. (v).Moreover, it would be pertinent to mention here that to a pointed query made by this Court, it has come to surface that nobody whose case has been rejected by Justice Agarwal Commission and Justice S.B. Sinha Commission has been considered by the State Government or by the University; so there is no discrimination, as alleged by the petitioner. 10. As a cumulative effect of the aforesaid facts, reasons and judicial pronouncements, I am of considered view that the writ application does not warrant any interference by this Court and the same is accordingly dismissed, being devoid of any merit.