Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:89624 Court No. - 38 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 37119 of 1991 Petitioner :- Arvind Kumar Dwivedi Respondent :- The Director Of Training And Employment And Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Pravesh Chandra Mishra,Sachida Nand Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- S.C. with Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13631 of 2017 Petitioner :- Arvind Kumar Dwivedi Respondent :- The Director Of Training And Employment Dte.U.P And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sachida Nand Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Donadi Ramesh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 2. Originally, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing Writ A No. 37119 of 1991 for consideration of his case for regularization. He has been continuing in service without any break. 3. During pendency of Writ A No. 37119 of 1991, the petitioner has filed Writ A No. 13631 of 2017 to quash the order dated 24.11.2016, whereby the respondents have recalled the regularization order passed in favour of the petitioner on 29.08.2005. In Writ A No. 37119 of 1991, petitioner has filed an amendment application being Civil Misc. Amendment Application No. 12 of 2025 with a prayer to question the validity of the order dated 29.08.2005 regularizing the services of the petitioner considering the case of the petitioner for regularization from 16.12.2003, they have regularized the services from 29.08.2005. 4. Considering the submissions made, Civil Misc. Amendment Application No. 12 of 2025 is allowed. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is entitled for regularization from 16.12.2003 as the entire batch of other persons have been regularized from the said date. Admittedly, the petitioner's case was sponsored by the Employment Exchange, hence he is also eligible from 16.12.2003, but the respondents have wrongly regularized the services of the petitioner from 29.08.2005. 6. Considering the submissions made and also perusal of the record, both the writ petitions stand disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation within two weeks, bringing all facts to the notice of the respondents. The respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner based on the record, if required, after providing opportunity of hearing and pass appropriate orders within a further period of two months. If the respondents came to the conclusion that regularization is wrongly done from 2005, if his case is considered from 2003, it is needless to say to release all monetary benefits to the petitioner. Order Date :- 26.5.2025 Noman (Donadi Ramesh, J.) Digitally signed by :- NOMAN AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- NOMAN AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad