Contractual employees may not claim regularization based on prolonged service or failed applications for higher posts, as employment must adhere to constitutional recruitment mandates.

JUDGMENT

V. Kameswar Rao, J. (Oral)--The present petition has been filed by eight persons with the following prayers:

"In view of the facts narrated and grounds set out in this writ petition, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be graciously pleased to

(a) call for the relevant records relating to the contractual employment of the petitioners herein as also relevant records leading to the issue of the notification dated 09-11-2019 (Annexure P-6) and other kindred records leading to the issue of order dated 23-07-2020 (annexure P-9) and examine the extent of injustice meted to the petitioners in;

(b) issue a writ in the nature mandamus or any other suitable writ or direction or order directing the respondents to consider the case for regularization from the very date of initial engagement and afford the petitioners the consequential reliefs, such as pay and allowances, annual increments, leave and leave encashment and other benefits which may be granted in accordance the provisions of the VII Pay Commission recommendations as admissible to the regular employees of the TRIFED, of corresponding post.

This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court deem fit to meet the ends of justice."

2. It is the case of the petitioners that their initial engagement on contract basis was in the years 2010/2011 on the post of Assistant Grade-I (now Senior Assistant) and Clerk (now called as Junior Assistant) through a selection process which is undertaken for making regular appointment. Their engagement was renewed from time to time with artificial breaks. Some of the petitioners were also given appointment on higher posts. Though, the appointments were with the nomenclature "on contract basis" but for all purposes it was a regular appointment except the fact that the remuneration that is being paid, is not that of a regular appointee.

3. The cause of action for them to approach this Court by way of this petition was triggered on the issuance of notification dated November 09, 2019 by the respondent whereby the respondent advertised the filling up various posts on direct recruitment basis. These posts include that of Deputy Manger, Sales Executive, Senior Accountant, etc. It is their case that as they are eligible and have been performing their duties sincerely/diligently hence are entitled to be regularized on the posts on which they are working. According to them, they now being overage for any job outside the respondent organization, the respondent should regularize their services. They have referred to the various representations made by them requesting the authorities in the respondent organization, for regularization of their services. Unfortunately, the same have not been replied to. It is averred in the petition that legal advice was sought on the aspect of regularizing the services of the petitioners, wherein it is opined, that the petitioners past contractual services could well be reckoned for purposes of seniority and age limit shall not be a bar and precedents are available when in 2012 individuals who had temporary status were regularized.

4. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent wherein it is stated that the respondent is a Multi State Cooperative Society under the administrative control of