In brief facts of the case are that appellant petitioner at the first instance preferred a petition for writ before this Court bearing No. 27743 of 2003 that came to be disposed of on 04.07.2003. In the case aforesaid a direction was given to consider and decide the representation submitted by the appellant petitioner for regularization of his services on the post of Sweeper. In pursuance to the direction given the authority competent decided the representation by regularizing services of the appellant petitioner w.e.f. 01.08.2004. After receiving the order dated 01.08.2004, the appellant petitioner submitted another representation on 20.01.2005 with the assertion that he is entitled to be regularized in service w.e.f. 18.03.1987, the date on which persons junior to him including Shah Alam were regularized. On being failed to get any relief in the administrative side the appellant petitioner preferred a petition for writ i.e. Writ-A No. 42983 of 2005 with a prayer for his regularization in service w.e.f. 18.03.1987. Learned single Bench dismissed the petition for writ by arriving at the conclusion that no effective relief by issuing writ in the nature of mandamus can be given since appellant petitioner has not questioned the correctness of the order dated 06.08.2004.
