It is necessary to note that none of these 13 candidates are parties to the present writ petition. In the absence of their being arrayed as respondents herein, it is not for this Court to examine as to whether their appointment to the posts of Assistants/Typists in the Life Insurance Corporation, in accordance with the National Policy on Education, 1986, runs contrary to the statutory regulations or not. Even if it were to be assumed that the appointment of these 13 persons is contrary to the statutory regulations, the mere fact that they were so appointed would not confer any right on the petitioners herein to claim parity since it is well settled that no Mandamus can be sought for from this Court to perpetuate an illegality. ( Chandigarh Administration v. Jagjit Singh[1] ). Further, as held by the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Secretary, State of Karnataka and others v. Umadevi[2] , no mandamus can be issued directing regularisation of the petitioners herein. The very fact that the petitioners had approached this Court earlier,
