JUDGMENT :

Satyen Vaidya, J.

Since all these petitions involve identical questions of facts and law, therefore, these are being decided by a common judgment.

2. Petitioners in CWP Nos. 5090 of 2022, 5278 of 2022 and 5124 of 2022 were appointed as Trained Graduate Teachers in the Department of Elementary Education, in the year 2010, under the 3% quota for disabled persons. Petitioners in CWP Nos. 5122 of 2022 and 5276 of 2022, were appointed as Peons (Class-IV) in Health and Family Welfare Department, in the year 2008, under the 3% quota for disabled persons.

3. The petitioners were appointed on contract basis. By way of instant petitions, they are seeking the relief that they be considered on regular basis from the date of their initial appointments.

4. The aforesaid claim of petitioners has been denied to them by the respondents, primarily on the ground that the Recruitment and Promotion Rules in vogue for the respective posts of petitioners, at the time of their respective appointments, provide for two modes of appointments, one by appointment on contract basis and other on regular basis. Since, the initial appointments of petitioners was in accordance with the relevant Recruitment an