JUDGMENT :

S. Muralidhar, J.

This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 26th August, 2016 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the Appellant's Writ Petition (C) No. 7502/2016. This appeal raises important questions of law concerning the interpretation of the word 'establishment' under Section 2(k) of the Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 ('the PWD Act') and Section 47 thereof.

Background facts

2. The background facts are that the Appellant applied in 2001 pursuant to an advertisement issued by the Respondent No.1, Foundation for Innovation and Technology Transfer ('FITT') for the post of Executive Consultant, Technology Transfer and IPR. The advertisement stated that the appointment would be on 'contract initially for a period of three years renewable with mutual consent'. The Appellant was selected and appointed on 30th October, 2001 for a period of three years which appointment was formalised by a contract dated 3rd December, 2001.

3. On 3rd December, 2004 the Appellant's contract was extended. It was again extended on 18th January 2008. On 27th November 2008 it was extended for two years. On 19th November 2010 h