Contractual employees have no vested right to continuation of service beyond the agreed term, and the court cannot compel an employer to extend such contracts.

JUDGMENT :

1. The petitioners have filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying therein that the respondents by issuance of writ of mandamus, be directed to allow the petitioners to complete the period of three years of services as mandated vide condition/clause No. XII of the Government Order No. 398- JK(HME) of 2021 dated 18.05.2021. Furthermore, respondents be directed to release Ayushman incentives as well as Covid incentives in terms of the Notification No. 01-HME of 2019 dated 19.01.2019 in favour of the petitioners. Further prayer of the petitioners is that the respondents be directed to incorporate the condition in the future advertisement notice with regard to “05 numbers” as weightage, as has been done in the previous advertisement notices, where ‘05 numbers’ as weightage, had been given to the candidates, who were engaged for the period of three months in the Government Institute under the “Emergency Covid Response Programme” (ECRP) on contractual basis and the same shall be accorded to the petitioners herein in future advertisement notices or appointments.

2. Essentially, the case of the petitioners is that they were appointed on contractual basis for a period of one year on the tenure based posts of Physicians, Anesthetists, Pediatricians, Medical Officer, Nursing and Paramedical/Technical staff, in terms of the Government Order No. 398-JK(HME) of 2021 dated 18.05.2021, vide which two 500 bedded temporary Covid Hospitals, one each at Jammu and at Srinagar were established, and 1366 such posts were created (683 posts for each Hospital), for making these two facilities operational, in collaboration with the Defense Research and Development Organization (DRDO), Ministry of Defense, Government of India.

3. It is pleaded that the petitioners came to be engaged in terms of the respective engagement orders, when one year of contractual engagement of the petitioners came to an end in the year 2022, when in terms of communication No. ME-Gztd/198/2022 dated 08.08.2022, addressed by the Health and Medical Education Department of J&K Government, to the Principal Government Medical College Srinagar, on the approval of Administrative Department, providing for the grant of extension in the tenure of the engagement of the staff, actually on the rolls/ working in the said 500 bedded Covid Hospital at Khunmoh Srinagar, which was accorded upto 31.12.2022.

4. The petitioners, however, claimed that at the end of the extension period, the petitioners still continued to report for their duties though without any formal order of extension of their engagements. In such a state of uncertainty with respect to engagement status of the petitioners’ post 31.12.2022, the petitioners have come up with the instant writ petition.

5. Pursuant to notice, respondents filed their reply asserting therein that the petitioners are trying to mislead this Court by sheer misrepresentation of material facts and have not approached this Court with clean hands. It is stated in the said reply that the respondents in order to provide medical care to the Covid-19 patients of UT of J&K, two 500 bedded temporary Covid Hospitals, one each at Jammu and Srinagar were established in collaboration with the DRDO vide Government Order No. 398-JK(HME) of 2021 dated 18.05.2021. It is further stated that since the pandemic was unprecedented and needed immediate measures, therefore, to meet the dearth of medical staff, many people were engaged on temporary basis initially for a period of one year, however, after the decline of Covid cases in the UT, both the Hospitals were closed down and deployed staff was repatriated back to their concerned departments. The contractual staff, however, was engaged for only one year, after the expiration of which the same was extended upto 31.12.2022 and thereafter no extension was granted. It is stated that in view of the closure of DRDO Hospitals, there was no justification for extending the tenure as the petitione