JUDGMENT : 1. Heard Sri Som Kartik, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Jogendra Nathi Verma, learned State counsel. 2. In view of the order proposed to be passed and keeping in view the age of litigation, notice to respondent Nos. 4 and 5 is dispensed with. 3. Initially, the writ petition was filed for the following main reliefs :- "(i) Issue a writ, direction or order in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties no. 1 to 3 to grant approval to the Petitioner's appointment on the post of ad-hoc Sanskrit Lecturer and allow him all the consequential benefits including salary on the said post from the date of joining the said post i.e. 1.8.1985. (ii) Issue a writ, direction or order in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties no. 1 to 3 to regularise the petitioner's appointment on the post of Sanskrit Lecturer from the date of the G.O. dated 6.4.1991 and allow him all the consequential benefits of the post from the said date including arrears of salary." 4. During the pendency of the present writ petition, the respondent No. 5/Regional Selection Committee, Allahabad Region, Allahabad passed the order dated 21.12.2010, whereby the case of the petitioner for regularization on the post of Lecturer, Sanskrit was taken up he was regularized keeping in view the provisions of Section 33-C of the U.P. Secondary Education [Services Selection Boards] Act, 1982 (in short "Act, 1982"), which reads as under:- "[33C. Regularisation of certain more appointments. Regularisation of certain more appointments. -(1) Any teacher who - (a)(i) was appointed by promotion or by direct recruitment on or after May 14, 1991 but not later than August 6, 1993 on ad hoc basis against substantive vacancy in accordance with section 18, in the Lecturer grade or the Trained Graduate grade; (ii) was appointed by promotion on or after July 31,1988 but not later than August 6,1993 on ad hoc basis against a substantive vacancy in the post of a Principal or Head Master in accordance with Section 18; (b) possesses the qualification prescribed under, or is exempted from such qualification in accordance with, the provisions of the Intermediate Education Act, 1921; (c) has been continuously serving the Institution from the date of such appointment up to the date of the commencement of the Uttar Pradesh Secondary Education Services Commission (Amendment) Act, 1998; (d) has been found suitable for appointment in a substantive capacity by a Selection Committee constituted under sub-section (2); shall be given substantive appointment by the Management. (2) (a) For each region, there shall be a Selection Committee comprising, - (i) Regional Joint Director of Education of that region, who shall be the Chairman; (ii) Regional Deputy Director of Education (Secondary) who shall be member; (iii) Regional Assistant Director of Education (Basic) who shall be a member. In addition to above members, the District Inspector of Schools of the concerned district shall be co-opted as member while considering the cases for regularisation of that district. (b) The Procedure of selection for substantive appointment under sub-section (1) shall be such as may be prescribed. (3) (a) The names of the teachers shall be recommended for substantive appointment in order of seniority as determined from the date of their appointment. (b) If two or more such teachers are appointed on the same date, the teacher who is elder in age shall be recommended first. (4) Every teacher appointed in a substantive capacity under sub-section (1) shall be deemed to be on probation from the date of such substantive appointment. (5) A teacher who is not found suitable under sub-section (1) and a teacher who is not eligible to get a substantive appointment under that sub-section shall cease to hold the appointment on such date as the State Government may by order specify. (5) A teacher who is not found suitable under sub-section (1) and a teacher who is not eligible to get a substantive appointment under that sub-section shall cease to hold the appointment on such date as the State Government may by order specify. (6) Nothing in this Section shall be construed to entitle any teacher to substantive appointment, if on the date of commencement of the Ordinance referred to in clause (c) of sub-section (1) such vacancy had already been filled or selection for such vacancy has already been made in accordance with this Act.]" 5. As per the order of regularization dated 21.12.2010, the petitioner was regularized w.e.f. 20.04.1998. It is without going to say that Section 33-C was inserted in the Act, 1982 vide U.P. Act No. 25 of 1998 dated 25.07.1998 w.e.f. 20.04.1998. 6. After the order dated 21.12.2010 passed by the respondent No. 5, the petitioner moved an application for amendment in the writ petition, thereby seeking incorporation of certain facts and grounds as well as the reliefs. The reliefs incorporated in the writ petition by moving the application for amendment, which was allowed vide order dated 04.03.2013, are as under:- "(ii)(a) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 21.12.2010 [Annexure No. 11(a)] of the Regional Committee to the extent it has regularized the services of the petitioner w.e.f. 20-4-1998. (ii)(b) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Regional Committee to regularize the petitioner w.e.f. the date of his appointment i.e. 1-8-1985." 7. Sri Som Kartik, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the present writ petition survives only for the relief Nos. (ii) (a) and (ii) (b). 8. Assailing the order dated 21.12.2010, whereby the services of the petitioner have been regularized w.e.f. 20.04.1998 and consequential relief(s) sought by the petitioner to the effect that his regularization be considered w.e.f. 01.08.1985, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Lecturer, Sanskrit vide order of appointment dated 27.07.1985, for which the resolution was also passed by the respondent No. 3/Committee of Management on 25.07.1985. 9. 9. The appointment on the post of Lecturer, Sanskrit was made by way of promotion on vacant post of Lecturer, Sanskrit as per the procedure prescribed under para-2 of the Uttar Pradesh Secondary Education Service Commission (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 1981 (in short "Order, 1981"). 10. Keeping in view the appointment of the petitioner by way of promotion by the competent Authority in the year 1985, as per the procedure prescribed under para-2 of Order, 1981 as well as the provisions inserted in the Act, 1982 i.e. Section 33-A (1-A), inserted in the Act, 1982 vide U.P. Act No. 26 of 1991, which provides deemed regularization, the case of the petitioner ought to have been considered by the respondents for regularization under Section 33-A (1-A) of the Act, 1982 and ignoring the same, the appointment of the petitioner by way of promotion was considered by the respondent No. 5 for regularization under Section 33-C of the Act, 1982 and accordingly, the respondent No. 5 committed error of law and fact both. Section 33-A of the Act, 1982 on reproduction reads as under:- "[33A. Regularisation of certain appointment. Section 33-A of the Act, 1982 on reproduction reads as under:- "[33A. Regularisation of certain appointment. -(1) Every teacher directly appointed before the commencement of the Uttar Pradesh Secondary Education Services Commission and Selection Boards (Amendment) Ordinance, 1985, on ad hoc basis against a substantive vacancy in accordance with paragraph 2 of the Uttar Pradesh Secondary Education Services Commission (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 1981, as amended from time to time, who possesses the qualifications prescribed under, or is exempted from such qualification in accordance with the provisions of the Intermediate Education Act, 1921, shall, with effect from the date of such commencement, be deemed to have been appointed in a substantive capacity provided such teacher has been continuously serving the Institution from the date of such appointment up to the date of such commencement.] [(1A) Every teacher appointed by promotion on ad hoc basis against a substantive vacancy in accordance with paragraph 2 of the Uttar Pradesh Secondary Education Services Commission (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 1981, as amended from time to time, who possesses the qualifications prescribed under or, is exempted from such qualifications in accordance with the provisions of the Intermediate Education Act, 1921 shall, with effect from the date of commencement of the Uttar Pradesh Secondary Education Services Commission and Selection Boards (Amendment) Act, 1991, be deemed to have been appointed in a substantive capacity, provided such teacher has been continuously serving the Institution from the date of such ad hoc appointment to the date of such commencement. (1B) Every teacher directly appointed after June 12, 1985 and before May 13, 1989 on ad hoc basis against a substantive vacancy in the Certificate of Teaching Grade in accordance with paragraph 2 of the Uttar Pradesh Secondary Education Services Commission (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 1981 as amended from time to time who possesses the qualifications prescribed under, or is exempted from such qualification in accordance with the provisions of the Intermediate Education Act, 1921 shall with effect from the commencement of the Uttar Pradesh Secondary Education Services Commission and Selection Boards (Amendment) Act, 1991, be deemed to have been appointed in substantive capacity provided such teacher has been continuously serving the Institution from the date of such ad hoc appointment to the date of such commencement. (1C) Every teacher appointed by promotion or by direct recruitment before July 31,1988 on ad hoc basis against a substantive vacancy in accordance with Section 18, who possesses the qualifications prescribed under, or is exempted from such qualification in accordance with the provisions of the Intermediate Education Act, 1921, shall, with effect from the date of commencement of the Uttar Pradesh Secondary Education Services Commission and Selection Boards (Amendment) Act, 1991, be deemed to have been appointed in a substantive capacity, provided such teacher has been continuously serving the Institution from the date of such ad hoc appointment to the date of such commencement.] [(2) Every teacher deemed to have been appointed in a substantive capacity under sub-section (1) or (1-A) or (1B) or (1-C), shall be deemed to he on probation from the date of commencement referred to in sub-section (1) or (1A) or (1-B) or (1-C) as the case may be.] (3) Nothing in this Section shall be construed to entitle any teacher to substantive appointment - (a) if on the date of [commencement referred to in subsection (1) or (1-A) or (1-B) or (1-C) such post had already been filled or selection for such post had already been made in accordance with this Act, or (b) if such teacher was related to any member of the Committee of Management or the Principal or Head Master of the Institution concerned. Explanation. -For the purposes of this sub-section a person shall be deemed to be related to another if - (i) they are members of a Hindu undivided family; or (ii) they are husband and wife; or (iii) the one is related to the other in the manner indicated in the Second Schedule to the Intermediate Education Act, 1921.]" 11. It is further stated that the case of the petitioner for regularization was considered under Section 33-C of the Act, 1982, whereas the petitioner was appointed by way of promotion within the cut off date provided under Section 33-A (1-A) of the Act, 1982, as such keeping in view the same, the petitioner is entitled for regularization w.e.f. 01.08.1985 and in not providing the same, the respondents erred in law and facts both. 12. The prayer is to interfere in the matter and allow the writ petition. 13. 12. The prayer is to interfere in the matter and allow the writ petition. 13. Per contra, Sri Jogendra Nath Verma, learned State counsel, on the basis of the counter affidavit filed to the amended paras of the writ petition and in support of the order dated 21.12.2010, submitted that the order dated 21.12.2010 is just and proper in the eye of law and is not liable to interfered with. 14. Elaborating his arguments, Sri Jogendra Nathi Verma, learned State counsel submitted that in fact, five posts of Lecturer, Sanskrit in the institution namely Ram Naresh Intermediate College, Pure Dhanau, Kunda, Pratapgarh (in short "College") were created vide order dated 11.03.1981 of the Deputy Director of Education, Faizabad. 15. On the post in issue, an adhoc appointment was made on 21.02.1983 and thereafter, the person who was appointed on the said post did not turn back and subsequently, the vacancy was notified. The selection was held by the Board as per the procedure provided in the Act, 1982 and the Board selected one Sri Jitendra Kumar Sashtri. 16. Taking into account the selection of Sri Jitendra Kumar Sashtri on the vacant post of Lecturer, Sanskrit, the respondent No. 2/DIOS vide letter dated 27.05.1985 directed the respondent No. 3 to permit the joining of Sri Jiterndra Kumar Shashtri. The person selected by the Board namely Sri Jitendra Kumar Shastri never turned up and joined the post in question. 17. Keeping in view the said fact, the vacancy was considered as substantive vacancy vide order dated 10.07.1989, passed by the DIOS and thereafter, the vacancy was again notified. 18. After the order dated 10.07.1989, whereby the DIOS considered the vacancy as substantive vacancy, the Committee of Management passed the resolution dated 12.01.1992 in favour of the petitioner. 19. By the resolution dated 12.01.1992, the petitioner was promoted on the post of Lecturer, Sanskrit in the institution and the appointment of the petitioner was approved. Thereafter, the case of the petitioner for regularization was considered vide order dated 21.12.2010. The service of the petitioner were regularized under the provisions as envisaged under Section 33-C of the Act, 1982. 20. By the resolution dated 12.01.1992, the petitioner was promoted on the post of Lecturer, Sanskrit in the institution and the appointment of the petitioner was approved. Thereafter, the case of the petitioner for regularization was considered vide order dated 21.12.2010. The service of the petitioner were regularized under the provisions as envisaged under Section 33-C of the Act, 1982. 20. In this factual background, learned State counsel submitted that in fact the substantive vacancy came into existence in the year 1989 and subsequent to the same, the petitioner was appointed by way of promotion by the Committee of Management and keeping in view the date of appointment i.e. 01.01.1992 as well as the provisions as envisaged under Section 33-C of the Act, 1982, the regularization of the petitioner was done. Thus, the order dated 21.12.2010 is not liable to be interfered with by this Court. The prayer is to dismiss the writ petition. 21. Heard the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 22. In the instant case, the claim of the petitioner is that he was appointed by way of promotion on 27.07.1985 under the Order of 1981 and joined on the post on 01.08.1985 and accordingly, he is entitled for regularization under Section 33-A (1-A) w.e.f. 01.08.1985. 23. It appears from the above quoted provisions including Section 33A (1-A) that for the purposes of regularization under the aforesaid provisions of the Act, 1982, one of the relevant contingency is that the vacancy should be "substantive vacancy" and if promotion is made on the substantive vacancy on adhoc basis after following the proper procedure as mentioned in relevant provision i.e. Order of 1981 and a candidate also fulfills other eligibility provided under the aforesaid provision(s) then in that event the incumbent of the post can be regularized under the above quoted provision(s). 24. In view of the aforesaid, the question which is to be considered in the present case is that on which date the "substantive vacancy" came into existence? 25. For coming to the conclusion on the above said question, to the view of this Court, in addition to above referred provision, Section 18 of the Act, 1982, on relevant time, and Order of 1981 are also relevant. 25. For coming to the conclusion on the above said question, to the view of this Court, in addition to above referred provision, Section 18 of the Act, 1982, on relevant time, and Order of 1981 are also relevant. Accordingly, the relevant portion of the same are quoted below for ready reference:- Section 18 of the Act, 1982:- "18 Ad hoc Teachers.-(1) Where the management has notified a vacancy to the Commission in accordance with the provisions of this Act, and- (a) the commission has failed to recommended the name of any suitable candidate for being appointed as a teacher specified in the Schedule within one year from the date of such notification ; or (b) the post of such teacher has actually remained vacant for more than two months, then, the management may appoint, by direct recruitment or promotion, a teacher on purely ad hoc basis from amongst the person possessing qualifications prescribed under the Intermediate Education Act, 1921 or the regulations made thereunder." Order of 1981:- "1. Short title and commencement.-The Order may be called the Uttar Pradesh Secondary Education Services Commission (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 1981. (2) It shall come into force at once. 2. Vacancies in which ad hoc appointment can be made.-The management of an institution may appoint by promotion or by direct recruitment a teacher on purely ad hoc basis in accordance with the provisions of this Order in the following case, namely ; (a) in the case of a substantive vacancy existing on the date of commencement of this Order caused by death, retirement, resignation or otherwise; (b) in the case of a leave vacancy, where the whole or unexpired portion of the leave is for a period exceeding two months on the date of such commencement ; (c) Where a vacancy of the nature in Clause (a) or Clause (b) comes into existence within a period of two months subsequent to the date of such commencement. 3. Duration of ad hoc appointments.-Every appointment of an ad hoc teacher under Paragraph 2 shall cease to have effect from the earliest of the dates, namely : (a) when the candidates recommended by the Commissioner or the Board joins the post ; or (b) when the period of six months from the date of such ad hoc appointment expires. 4. Duration of ad hoc appointments.-Every appointment of an ad hoc teacher under Paragraph 2 shall cease to have effect from the earliest of the dates, namely : (a) when the candidates recommended by the Commissioner or the Board joins the post ; or (b) when the period of six months from the date of such ad hoc appointment expires. 4. Ad hoc appointment by promotion.-(1)" Every vacancy in the post of the Head of an institution may be filled by promotion : (a) in the case of an Intermediate College, by the senior-most teacher of the institution in the lecturer's grade ; (b) in the case of a High School raised to the level of an Intermediate College, by the Headmaster of such High School ; (c) in the case of a Junior High School raised to the level of a High School, by the Headmaster of such Junior High School ; (2) Every vacancy in the post of a teacher in Lecturers grade may be filled by promotion by the sernior-most teacher of the institution in the trained-graduate (L. T.) grade. (3) Every vacancy in the post of a teacher in the trained graduate (L. T.) grade shall be filled by promotion by the serniormost teacher of the institution in the trained Undergraduate (C. T.) grade. (4) Every vacancy in the post of a teacher in the trained under-graduate (C. T.) grade shall be filled by promotion by the seniormost teacher of the institution in the J. T. C. grade or B.T.C. grade. Explanation.-For the purposes of clauses (1) to (4) of this paragraph, the expression "senior-most teacher" means the teacher having longest continuous service in the Lecturer's grade or the trained graduate (L. T.) grade, or trained Under-graduate (C. T.) grade or J. T. C. or B. T. C. grade as the case may be." 26. Explanation.-For the purposes of clauses (1) to (4) of this paragraph, the expression "senior-most teacher" means the teacher having longest continuous service in the Lecturer's grade or the trained graduate (L. T.) grade, or trained Under-graduate (C. T.) grade or J. T. C. or B. T. C. grade as the case may be." 26. From the aforesaid provisions, so far as it relates to regularization of appointment is concerned, it appear that:- (i) Ad-hoc appointment should have been made by the Committee of Management on "substantive vacancy" (ii) Ad-hoc appointment can be made against "substantive vacancy" by the Committee of Management, if the Management has notified the vacancy to the Commission and- (a) the Commission failed to recommend the name of suitable candidate for being appointed as a Teacher within one year from the date of notification of vacancy by the Management, or (b) the post of such teacher has actually remained vacant for more than two months. (iii) Such Ad-hoc appointee (Teacher) has been continuously serving the institution from the date of appointment to the date of commencement of the Amending Act of 1991. (iv) "Vacancy" would be "substantive vacancy" if it comes into existence on account of death, retirement, resignation or otherwise. 27. (iii) Such Ad-hoc appointee (Teacher) has been continuously serving the institution from the date of appointment to the date of commencement of the Amending Act of 1991. (iv) "Vacancy" would be "substantive vacancy" if it comes into existence on account of death, retirement, resignation or otherwise. 27. For considering the issue involved in the instant case, this Court is also of the view to quote the resolution of the Committee of Management dated 25.07.1985 and the second resolution dated 12.01.1992, the same read as under:- Resolution dated 25.07.1985:- ^^ÁcU/k lfefr dk ÁLrko la03 fnukad 25-07-85 fo"k;& fo|ky; esa ÁoDrk ¼laLd`r½ in ij rnFkZ fu;qfDr ds lEcU/k esa fopkjA laLFkk ÁcU/kd us ÁcU/k lfefr dks voxr djk;k fd laLFkk esa laLrqr ÁoDrk gsrq ek/;fed f'k{kk lsok vk;ksx }kjk p;fur vH;FkhZ Jh ftrsUnz dqekj 'kkL=h dk uke ft0fo0fujh{kd] Árkixढ+ }kjk lalwfpr fd;s tkus ds ckn gh Jh ';keyky rnFkZ ÁoDrk ¼laLd`r½ us laLFkk esa dk;Z djuk NksM+ fn;k gS ftlls l= 84&85 ds vUr ls gh b.Vj d{kkvksa esa laLd`r f'k{k.k esa dfBukbZ gks jgh gSA ek0f'k0lsok vk;ksx m0Á0 bykgkckn }kjk p;fur vH;FkhZ Jh ftrsUnz dqekj 'kkL=h dks ÁcU/k lfefr dh lgefr ls ÁcU/kd }kjk fu;qfDr i= iszf"kr fd;k tk pqdk gS] fdUrq Jh 'kkL=h us laLFkk esa dk;ZHkkj xzg.k ugha fd;kA ,slh fLFkfr esa b.Vj d{kkvksa esa laLd`r fo"k; ds v/;kiu gsrq laLFkk esa dk;Zjr ÁoDrk laLd`r in gsrq ,dek= vgZ f'k{kd Jh ckyd`".k feJ] ,e0,0 ¼laLd`r½ ch0,0 dks inksUufr Ánku dj rnFkZ fu;qfDr gsrq Ádj.k fopkjFkZ ÁcU/k lfefr ds le{k Á/kkukpk;Z dh Árkixढ++ esa dk;Zjr f'k{kdksa esa Jh ckyd`".k feJ gh ,dek= laLd`r ÁoDrk in gsrq vgZ f'k{kd gSaA laLFkk dks b.VjehfM,V dh ekU;rk ÁkfIr dkykof/k ls v|r% le; le; ij ÁoDrk ds vHkko esa Jh ckyd`".k feJ gh b.Vj laLd`r fo"k; dk v/;kiu djrs jgs gSaA buds v/;kiu ls Nk= ,oa vf/kdkjhx.k iw.kZ laUrq"V jgs gSaA vr% Jh ckyd`".k feJ l0 v0 dks inksUUkfr nsdj rnFkZ ÁoDrk ¼laLd`r½ in gsrq ek0f'k0lsok vk;ksx ls p;fur vH;FkhZ ds dk;ZHkkj xzg.k djus dh frfFk rd ds fy, ÁcU/kd egksn; }kjk ÁLrkfor fd;k x;kA ÁcU/k lfefr ds lnL;x.k }kjk xgu fopkjksijkar Jh ckyd`".k feJ l0 v0 dks inksUUkfr Ánku dj rnFkZ ÁoDrk ¼laLd`r½ in ij p;u dh Ácy laLrqfr loZlEefr ls dh tkrh gSA vfxze dk;Zokgh gsrq ÁcU/kd egksn; dks vf/kd`r fd;k tkrk gSA lR; Áfrfyfi Áekf.kr g0 jk?ko jke ik.Ms;** Resolution dated 12.01.1992:- ^^ÁLrko la[;k 2 fnukad 12-01-92 fo|ky; esa laLd`r ÁoDrk ds in ij inksUUkfr ds lEcU/k esa fopkjA fu.kZ;& laLFkk ÁcU/kd us ÁcU/k lfefr ds cSBd esa laLd`r ÁoDrk ds ekSfyd fjDr in ij vkt rd fu;fer fu;qfDr u gks ikus dh fLFkfr ij viuh vk[;k ÁLrqr djrs gq;s crk;k fd laLd`r ÁoDrk dk in loZÁFke dfBukbZ fuokj.k vkns'k ds vUrxZRk ft0fo0fu0] Árkixढ++ ds i=kad ek- @10001&10002 fnukad 15-1-82 }kjk Jh ';keyky dh rnFkZ fu;qfDr ls Hkjk x;k FkkA rRi'pkr ek0 f'k0 lsok vk;ksx m0Á0 }kjk bl in dks Hkjus gsrq fu;ekuqlkj p;u gqvkA vk;ksx }kjk p;fur gq;s vH;fFkZ;kas dk uke ft0 fo0 fu0 Árkixढ++ ds i=kad% ek-@9311&14@84&85 fn0 16-1- 85 ds vuqlkj Jh thrsUnz dqekj 'kkL=h irk }kjk dq0 iqrqy Ms eq[; okf.kT; v/kh{kd] dk;kZy; LVs'ku Hkou mRRkj jsyos okjk.klh dSUV rFkk f}rh; vH;FkhZ Jh n;k'kadj irk }kjk jks'kuyky iksLVeSu 32 cVkfy;u iks0 vkfQl ih0,0lh0 y[kuÅ ft0fo0fujh{kd] Árkixढ++ ds i=kad ek- @6681&82@86&87 fnukad 22-8-86 ds vuqlkj fu;qfDr gsrq Øe'k% ,d&,d djds ÁkIr gqvk Fkk ftUgsa jftLVMZ i= }kjk jftLVªh la0 26 fn0 10-2-85 ,d jftLVªh la0 5596 fn0 27&9&86 }kjk Øe'k% xzg.k fd;k x;k u bl lEcU/k esa mUgkasus dksbZ lwpuk gh fn;kA rRi'pkr ft0fo0fu0 Árkixढ++ }kjk dfBukbZ fuokj.k vkns'k ds vUrxZRk mDr rnFkZ fu;qDr v/;kid Jh ';keyky tqykbZ 85 ls bl laLFkk ls laLd`r ÁoDrk in ij dk;Z djuk NksM+ fn;kA ,slh fLFkfr esa laLd`r ÁoDrk dk in tqykbZ 85 ls fjDRk jgk fdUrq bl chp b.Vj d{kkvksa esa laLd`r fo"k; ds iBu&ikBu dk dk;Z fo|ky; eas dk;Zjr C.T. @ L.T. osruØe ds vgZ v/;kid Jh ckyd`".k feJ ,e0,0ch0,M0 }kjk dk;Z fd;k tkrk jgkA laLd`r fo"k; ds f'k{k.k dk;Z dk Hkkj vf/kd ns[krs gq, fn0 31&12&90 ls laLFkk esa laLd`r ÁoDrk in ij Jh f=Hkqou ukFk feJ dh rnFkZ fu;qfDr Hkh bl 'krZ ij dh xbZ dh rnFkZ fu;qfDr dk vuqeksnu ft0fo0fu0 Árkixढ++}kjk feyus ij gh osru ns; gksxkA fdUrq t0fo0fu0 Árkixढ++us vius i=kad ek0dq.Mk@10016@91&92 fn0 10-12-91 }kjk Jh f=Hkqou ukFk feJ vuqeksnu lEcU/kh i=koyh vukuqeksfnr fo|ky; dks okil dj fn;kA mlds i'pkr ls Jh f=Hkqou ukFk feJ 1 tuojh 92 ls fcuk fdlh lwpuk ds vius in ls dk;Z djuk NksM+ fn;k vkSj u rks fo|ky; esa mifLFkr gh gq,A ,slh fLFkfr esa laLFkk esa igys ls Lukrd osruØe esa dk;Zjr lgk;d v/;kid Jh cky d`".k feJ] ,e0,0¼laLd`r½ ch0,M0 tks fn0 1-1-91 ls vius vuqHko ds vk/kkj ij ÁoDrk osru Øe esa 50 Áfr'kr dksVs ds vUrxZRk inksUufr esa vgZ Hkh gSA mDr vukuqeksfnr rnFkZ ÁoDrk Jh f=Hkqou ukFk feJ }kjk viuk in NksM+dj pys tkus ds ckn ls gh fn0 1- 1-92 ls Jh ckyd`".k feJ ,e0,0 ¼laLd`r½ c0,l0 }kjk gh b.Vj d{kkvksa esa laLd`r fo"k; iढ+k;k tk jgk gSA pwafd laLd`r ÁoDrk dk in fn0 1-1-92 ls iw.kZr% fjDRk gS b.Vj f'k{kdksa esa laLd`r fo"k; ds ÁoDrk in gsrq ,d ek= vgZ f'k{kd Jh cky d`".k feJ ,e0,0¼laLd`r½ ch0,M dks inksUUkfr dj rnFkZ fu;qfDr gsrq Ádj.k fopkjkFkZ ÁcU/kd }kjk ÁcU/k lfefr ds le{k ÁLrko fd;k x;kA ÁcU/k lfefr ds lnL;ksa us loZ lEefr ls ÁcU/kd th ds ÁLrko dk leFkZu djrs gq, fopkjksijkUr fu.kZ; fy;k fd Jh ckyd`".k feJ tks laLFkk dks b.Vj dh ekU;rk ÁkIr ls le; ls gh vkt rd le;≤ ij vko'drkuqlkj ÁoDrk ds vHkko esa b.Vj laLd`r fo"k; dk v/;kiu dk;Z djrs jgs gSa] mUgsa LkaLd`r ÁoDrk ds fjDr in ij tcls ;g in iw.kZr% fjDr py jgk gS fn0 1-1-92 ls rnFkZ inksUufr djus dk fu.kZ; fy;k vkSj ÁoDrk in ds osru Hkqxrku gsrq foHkkx ls lgefr ÁkIr 13 djus ,oa bl lEcU/k esa vU; vko';drkuqlkj vfxze dk;Zokgh djus ,oa fjDr inksUUkfr ds vuqeksnu gsrq i=tkr ek0 f'k0 lsok vk;ksx m0Á0 dks Ásf"kr djus gsrq ÁcU/kd dks vf/kd`r fd;k lkFk gh lfefr us loZ lEEkfr ls ;g Hkh fu.kZ; fy;k fd Jh ckyd`".k feJ dks tc rd rnFkZ inksUUkfr dk foHkkxh; vuqeksnu u ÁkIr gks tk; mUgsa ÁkIr gksus okyk iwoZ osru mlh Øe esa Hkqxrku fd;k tkrk jgsA lR; Áfrfyfi Áekf.kr g0@& jk?ko jke ik.Ms; jkeujs'k b.VjehfM,V dkyst iwjs /kuÅ iksLV /kuks[kh ¼dq.Mk½] Árkixढ++** 28. From the bare perusal of the resolution dated 25.07.1985, it appears that the appointment of the petitioner by way of promotion on the post of Lecturer, Sanskrit was made purely on temporary basis taking into account the fact that the selected person namely Sri Jiterndra Kumar Shashtri did not join on the post in issue and the appointment was made subject to the joining of the selected candidate. 29. It is evident from the record that the post of Lecturer, Sanskrit was created vide order dated 11.03.1981 and prior to appointment on the post of Lecturer, Sanskrit by way of promotion of the petitioner, the said vacancy/post was notified, as appears from the resolution dated 27.07.1985, and one person namely Sri Jitendra Kumar Shastri was selected by the Commission, as per the procedure prescribed under the Act, 1982, and thereafter, on the directions issued by the DIOS, Pratapgarh vide letter dated 27.05.1985, the Committee of Management issued the letters dated 16.01.1985 and 09.07.1985 to the selected person Sri Jitendra Kumar Shastri for joining on the post, who did not responded to the said letters and never joined the institution. 30. Further, the petitioner was appointed by way of promotion in the year 1985 vide order dated 27.07.1985, on account of non joining of selected candidate namely Sri Jitendra Kumar Shastri and at that point of time, the vacancy was not notified by the Committee of Management. The vacancy was treated to be substantive vide order dated 10.07.1989. Thereafter, one Sri Tribhuvan Nath Mishra was also promoted on the post of Lecturer, Sanskrit w.e.f. 31.12.1990, who subsequently left the college. Thereafter, the petitioner was again promoted on the post of Lecturer, Sanskrit. 31. From the aforesaid facts and the provisions quoted hereinabove, it is apparent that on 27.07.1985, the date on which the petitioner was promoted on the post of Lecturer, Sanskrit, the vacancy was not substantive vacancy, as no requisition with regard to post/vacancy of Lecturer, Sanskrit was pending before the Commission. 32. Vide letter dated 10.07.1989, the vacancy was treated as substantive vacancy by the DIOS. After treating the vacancy as substantive vacancy vide letter dated 10.07.1989 issued by the DIOS, the petitioner was appointed by way of promotion on the post of Lecturer, Sanskrit w.e.f. 01.01.1992, as appears from the resolution dated 12.01.1992. This appointment of the petitioner by way of promotion was approved. 33. After treating the vacancy as substantive vacancy vide letter dated 10.07.1989 issued by the DIOS, the petitioner was appointed by way of promotion on the post of Lecturer, Sanskrit w.e.f. 01.01.1992, as appears from the resolution dated 12.01.1992. This appointment of the petitioner by way of promotion was approved. 33. It is also evident from the resolution dated 12.01.1992, which was passed after the letter of the DIOS dated 10.07.1989 by which the vacancy was considered as substantive vacancy, the promotion of the petitioner was considered and he was promoted under 50% quota and the promotion of the petitioner vide second resolution dated 12.01.1992 appears to be made by the Committee of Management as per the procedure prescribed. 34. Considering the aforesaid facts, the case of the petitioner for regularization was considered and thereafter, the order dated 21.12.2010 for regularizing the services of the petitioner w.e.f. 20.04.1998 was passed by the respondent No. 5. 35. From the aforesaid facts including the resolution of Committee of Management, quoted above, it is evident that the post of Lecturer, Sanskrit fell vacant substantively on 10.07.1989, on which date the DIOS treated the said vacancy as substantive vacancy. Prior to that date, the vacancy in question is not liable to be treated as "substantive vacancy". It is in view of conjoint reading of the facts of the case as also Section 18, on relevant time, and Order of 1981. 36. Accordingly, the appointment of the petitioner by way of promotion on the post of Lecturer, Sanskrit vide order dated 27.07.1985 was not against "substantive vacancy" and being so, he is not entitled for regularization w.e.f. 01.08.1985 (date of joining) under Section 33-A (1A) of the Act, 1982. 37. In view of the reasons recorded hereinabove, this Court is of the view that the petitioner is not entitled to the reliefs sought. 38. For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition lacks merit. It is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.