1. - Bunch of the writ petitions was disposed of by a common order dated 8th of May, 2009 wherein following directions have been given:-

"I. During continuation of the work, as detailed out hereinabove, the invocation of the last extension is arbitrary and illegal; and the consequential automatic termination orders of the petitioners are set aside.

II. The RPSC/DPC selected candidates/employees are still not available and next academic session is about to start; even urgent temporary appointments under Rule 28 of the Rules of 1971 are not possible due to short span of one month and a half left to start with the process of admission and academic session, therefore, as per the aims and objects of the Scheme, respondents are directed to consider the cases of the petitioners for continuation in service till regularly selected candidates from RPSC/persons selected and recommended by the DPC for promotion are made available in the light of the above observations;

III. Even in the case of appropriate order of continuation in service till regularly selected candidates from RPSC/DPC selected persons are available, the petitioners are not entitled for wages of the vacations, in other words when the schools are closed.

IV. In case the regularly selected candidates from RPSC/persons selected and recommended by the DPC for promotion are made available, then the respondents can terminate services of the petitioners after preparation of the seniority list on the State level as per their date of appointment and merit assigned to them, by following the principle of "last come first go" to the extent of availability of the selected candidates and while doing so, the respondents will keep the interest of the present students and prospective students in view."

2. The appeals have been preferred by the petitioners as well as by the State Government.

3. We have issued the notices on the appeals preferred by the State Government, however, the grievances and issues set out by the petitioners-appellants (for short "the appellants") are different, thus bunch of the appeals preferred by the appellants were heard separately.

4. The State of Rajasthan framed a Scheme to engage "Vidhyarthi Mitra" to undertake teaching work in the schools. As per the Scheme, a person residing in the area is to be engaged for teaching work. The said Scheme was approved by the Finance Department vide its circular dated 9.1.2007 and thereby "Vidharthi Mitra" was to be engaged on fixed remuneration of Rs. 4,000/- per month for Lecturer, Rs. 3,000/- for Senior Teacher and Rs. 2,750/- for Teacher Grade-Ill. Pursuant to the circular, the appellants were engaged for a fixed term with a stipulation that they can be continued till the candidates regularly selected or promoted by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission (for short "the RPSC") or Departmental Promotion Committee (for short "the DPC) respectively, are made available or till 29.2.2009, whichever is earlier. Fixed term appointment of "Vidyarthi Mitra" was made pursuant to the circulars dated 9.1.2007 and 2.6.2008. The term of the engagement was extended from 1.3.2009 to 15.4.2009 vide circular dated 4.12.2008. All the appellants approached the High Court at the stage when their term was to come to an end and in few cases, the writ petitions were filed even at a later stage. The writ petitions were disposed of by the learned Single Judge by a common order with certain directions already quoted above.

5. Learned counsel for appellants have challenged the impugned judgment mainly to claim following reliefs:-

(i) Denial of benefit of regularisation on the post the appellants were engaged;

(ii) Alternatively denial of the benefit of minimum of the pay scale of the post in view of the doctrine of "equal pay for equal work" and

(iii) Denial of the wages of summer vacations.

6. It is submitted by learned counsels that appellants are discharging the same duties as otherwise discharged by the regularly selected candidates as Lecturer,