JUDGMENT : P. Sam Koshy, J. The present is the second round of litigation on the issue of regularization. 2. The facts relevant for the disposal of the present writ petition is that the petitioner had filed an earlier round of litigation i.e. WPS No. 514/2016 seeking a direction to the respondents for considering the case of the petitioner for regularization. 3. The said writ petition stood disposed of on 06.02.2018, whereby this Court had directed the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner in accordance with the policy of the State Government dated 05.03.2008. 4. Perusal of the record would show that pursuant to the disposal of the writ petition on 06.02.2018, the department had constituted a committee to scrutinize the claim of the petitioner for regularization. Annexure P/3 dated 31.08.2018 is the report of the committee, who have categorically recommended the case of the petitioner for regularization and have also pointed out the fact that the petitioner as of now is being discharging his duties against the sanctioned vacant post. The report of committee also reflects that there are quit a few vacancies also available in the department, against which the petitioner could be accommodated. 5. The grievance now, which led to the filing of the second round of litigation is that, according to the petitioner, though there has been a recommendation made by the scrutiny committee in favour of the petitioner as early as on 31.08.2018, but thereafter the department has been repeatedly publishing advertisements after advertisement for filling up of the post of the Forest Guard and in the process all the posts, which are lying vacant may get exhausted, thereby the claim of the petitioner would get defeated and the recommendation made by the scrutiny committee also would become a futile exercise. 6. Given the nature of dispute raised by the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that ends of justice would serve if the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.1 as well as respondent No.2 to take an early decision on the recommendation made by the scrutiny committee on 31.08.2018 in respect of the claim for regularization made by the petitioner. 7. It is expected that the authorities would take a decision before finalization of the recruitment process initiated vide advertisement dated 12.12.2018. 8. 7. It is expected that the authorities would take a decision before finalization of the recruitment process initiated vide advertisement dated 12.12.2018. 8. As an interim measure, it is ordered that respondents shall not finalize the recruitment process from the aforementioned advertisement, till the claim of the petitioner is not finalized. 9. It is expected that the respondents would take a decision at the earliest preferably within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. 10. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed off.