JUDGMENT Ujjal Bhuyan, J. - Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. 2. We have heard Mr. Thombre, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. P. . Kutti, learned AGP for the respondents. 3. Petitioners in these two writ petitions are nurses having qualified in G M course. They are registered with the Maharashtra ursing Council. Without entering into the details as set out in the two writ petitions, we may refer to the identical prayers made which are as under: "A. This Writ Petition may kindly be allowed. B. By issuing an appropriate writ, order or directions in the like nature, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to conduct the Special Written Examination for the petitioners as like the special written examination held on 22.09.2019 and for that purpose issue necessary orders; C. Pending the hearing and final disposal of this Writ Petition, the respondents may kindly be directed to allow the petitioners to appear for the special written examination which is scheduled on 22.09.2019 and for that purpose issue necessary orders; D. Any other suitable and equitable reliefs may kindly be granted in favour of the Petitioners;" 4. Learned counsel for the parties are in agreement that the issue raised in the two writ petitions are covered by a division bench decision of this Court dated 06.10.2020 passed in Writ Petition o.11645 of 2019 and other connected cases. 5. In view of above, we may extract the relevant portion of the judgment and order dated 06.10.2020 which reads as under: "16. The reason by respondents that the government had no intention to regularize services of those who were not in services from the date of examination, appear to be over stretched rather over-reaching and not compatible with the decision as is appearing from the Government Resolution dated 28-06-2019. Moreover, while in paragraph 5 of the affidavit-in-reply fled by respondent o.1, it has been specifically referred to that issue arose in respect of nurses recruited during 01-01-2012 to 15-04-2015. Albeit, it is further superimposed referring to that, who were still working and confirmed and having regard to that rectification under government resolution dated 28-06-2019 was issued. Moreover, while in paragraph 5 of the affidavit-in-reply fled by respondent o.1, it has been specifically referred to that issue arose in respect of nurses recruited during 01-01-2012 to 15-04-2015. Albeit, it is further superimposed referring to that, who were still working and confirmed and having regard to that rectification under government resolution dated 28-06-2019 was issued. While it is so stated in the affidavit yet the government appears to have resolved to accommodate those nurses who were working till 15-04-2015 and it had not intended as contended in the reply were required to be working after the said date till the date of special examination. Regard may be had to the portions in Marathi, reproduced hereinabove. The government resolution does not at all refer to that the candidates shall be working till the examination is held. On the other hand, it specifically declares approval to that bonded nurses working up to 15-04-2015 would be considered eligible to appear at the special examination. It does not appear that the intention underlying the government resolution would be as sought to be interpreted as appearing from the two affidavits-in-reply respectively in paragraph o.7 of first and paragraph o.5 of later. Resistance in affidavit-in-reply is digressed from the underlying purpose spelt out in the resolution. The Government Resolution had been issued with a view to accommodate the nurses/staff appointed during the period from 01-01-2012 to 15-04-2015. Petitioners' claim that they were appointed during period from 01-01-2012 to 15-04- 2015 and were working up to the cutoff date has not been disputed. It is also to be noted that, they were appointed for 18 months on bond and their further continuation on ad-hoc or contractual basis were at the pleasure of respondents while respondents specifically refer to that the kind of services rendered by the petitioners were essential services for healthcare. 17. In the face of clauses reproduced hereinabove from the Government Decision dated 28-06-2019, insistence about being in service till the date of special examination incompatible with, incongruous to and digressed from the purpose underlying the same. The reason referred to reflecting reluctance and disinclination emerging from the affidavits-in-reply to consider petitioners eligible, is untenable. In the circumstances, the petition will have to be considered accordingly. 18. The reason referred to reflecting reluctance and disinclination emerging from the affidavits-in-reply to consider petitioners eligible, is untenable. In the circumstances, the petition will have to be considered accordingly. 18. Petitioners are stated to have appeared at the examination held on 22-09-2019 pursuant to interim directions issued by this court and it has further been referred to that, their results have also been declared and the petitioners have been declared to be successful in the same. 19. In the circumstances, the petitions stand disposed of in terms of prayer clause (B), and (C) as well albeit purpose under the same appears to have been worked out. 20. Rule is made absolute accordingly." 6. Accordingly, the two writ petitions are also disposed of in terms of prayer clauses (B) and (C) as extracted above, subject to the eligibility of the petitioners to appear in the special written examination for the post of staff nurse. However, as the special written examination scheduled on 22.09.2019 is over, let a fresh special written examination be conducted by the respondents within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 7. Both writ petitions are disposed of. 8. Rule made absolute in the aforesaid terms.