HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 44141 of 2012 Court No. - 38 HON'BLE DONADI RAMESH, J. 1. Heard Ms. Shambhavi Tiwari, holding brief of Sri Rohit Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Somesh Dutt Tripathi, holding brief of Sri Chandan Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents - University. 2. The present writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs: "(i) Issue writ, order Or direction in the nature mandamus commanding the respondent nos.2 to 4 to pay minimum wages to petitioners with arrears w.e.f. 1.1.2010 @ Rs.169/- per day in terms of office order dated 1.2.2010 (Annexure no.13 to the writ petition) and @ Rs.194/- per day w.e.f. 1.10.2010 in terms of office order dated 3.11.2011 (Annexure no.14 to the writ petition) and @ Rs.212/- w.e.f. 1.10.2011 and @ Rs.223/- w.e.f. 1.4.2012 in terms of office order dated 23.6.2012 (Annexure no.16 to the writ petition) issued by Registrar of the University. (ii) Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay wages for 30 or 31 days in each month irrespective of holidays as are paid to other daily wage employees in pursuance of office order dated 30.9.1994 (Annexure no.18 to the writ petition) issued by Registrar of the University. (iii) Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent nos.1 & 2 to absorb/regularize the services of petitioners pursuant to the decision/resolution of Executive Council of the University dated 13.9.2008. (iv) Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay benefit Non Productive Linked Bonus from session 2007-08 onwards as have been paid to other Class IVth (Group-D) daily wage employee of the University till they are regularly absorbed/regularized in their services." Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rohit Pandey, Tej Bhan Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : Chandan Sharma, S.C., S.Shekhar Shyam Lal And Others .....Petitioner(s) Vice Chancellor University Of Allahabad Alld. And Others .....Respondent(s) 3. While hearing the matter, it is brought to the notice of the Court that the petitioners' services have been dispensed with due to defunct of the hostel where there are no students. 4. Ms. Tiwari, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners though relied on the communication made by the warden in 2021 with regard to sanction of funds for payment of salaries to the petitioners but as on date, the undisputed fact is that the petitioners' services were dispensed with for non- functioning of the hostel. Therefore, she has requested that whenever the hostel is re-opened, preference may be given to the petitioners. 5. Considering the submissions and hearing the learned counsel for both the parties, the present writ petition is disposed of with the directions to the respondents, more particularly the 2nd respondent to consider the representation made by the petitioners and pass appropriate orders with regard to regularization of their services based on material available on record. 6. It is needless to mention that if the hostel is re-opened, preference may be given to the petitioners. September 23, 2025 rkg WRIA No. 44141 of 2012 2 (Donadi Ramesh,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad