ORDER

Anil Kshetarpal, J (Oral). - Hearing of the case was held through video conferencing on account of restricted functioning of the Courts.

2. The petitioners after having worked for a considerable period as contractual Canal Patwaris were directed to be relieved on attaining the age of superannuation prescribed for regular employees i.e. 58 years. The petitioners claim that they are required to be re-engaged on DC rates.

3. This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties at length and with their able assistance perused the paper book.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner first relied upon a judgment in Shivkesh and others Vs. State of Haryana and others in Civil Writ Petition No.13555 of 2013 decided on 02.06.2013. From a careful reading of the judgment, it is apparent that in that case Respected Brother Judge decided the case while relying upon a previous decision in Civil Writ Petition No.2346 of 2013, decided on 04.02.2013. A reference was also made to an executive order passed by the Executive Engineer, Adampur, District Hisar on 17th May, 2013 and to an outsourcing policy of the Haryana government dated 16.02.2009. He further drew the attention of the Court to various or