Temporary employment does not confer rights to regularization without compliance with formal recruitment processes and lawful guidelines, regardless of service duration.

COMMON JUDGMENT

These batch of writ petitions are filed to quash Ext.P-

5 notification and to declare that the petitioners are entitled to continue in their present occupation until they are replaced by permanent employees, through a valid recruitment process.

2. As the pleadings, points and reliefs sought in these six writ petitions are substantially similar in nature, common questions of law are involved, and the respondents are the same, the writ petitions were jointly heard, and they are being disposed of by this common judgment. For the sake of convenience, W.P (C) No.12799 of 2020 is treated as the leading case.

3. The case of the petitioners is that they are sub-

staff in the Divisional office and the Branch Offices under the Kozhikode Division of the first respondent ― Life Insurance Corporation of India (for brevity hereinafter referred to as "Corporation)." They have been working on a temporary basis since 2009-2012 till date. The petitioners are aggrieved by the action of the respondents in trying to replace them with outsourced temporary employees. The respondents are trying to terminate the services of the petitioners by resorting to arbitrary and illegal methods. The Corporation has refused to consider the candidature of the petitioners for regularisation to the post of sub-staff, although they have completed more than eight years of service. The Corporation is also attempting to remove the petitioners by replacing them with fresh temporary employees to the post of sub-staff, which is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

4. The petitioners have contended that they have been working as sub-staff on daily wages in the Divisional Office, Branch Offices and Satellite Offices under the Kozhikode Divisional office of the Corporation. The petitioners figure as sub-staff in the muster rolls of the Corporation. The petitioners have neither been absorbed nor given temporary status. The Corporation is paying salaries to the petitioners either by vouchers or through bank transfer. Several temporary employees of the Corporation have been absorbed in service based on various judgments of the Honourable Supreme Court, including in Civil Appeal Nos.953 - 968 of 2005. The petitioners were engaged by the Corporation when it was found that sufficient candidates were not available in the respective panels for recruitment to the Class-IV Cadre. The petitioners were appointed to the post of sub-staff invoking Clause V-2 (c) of Life Insurance Corporation of India (Employment of Temporary Staff) Instructions, 1993 ― Exhibit P-4.

5. The Corporation is now attempting to replace the petitioners by outsourcing the jobs of Class-IV employees in the different offices of the third respondent. Further enquiry has revealed that the Corporation has published Exhibit P-5 notification. Exhibit P-6 policy does not cover core jobs. The core jobs notified in Exhibit P-5 fall squarely within the realm of Exhibit P-4 Instructions, and hence they cannot be outsourced. Clause -IV of Exhibit P- 4 Instructions stipulate that one temporary employee cannot be replaced by another temporary employee, and must be replaced only by way of a regularly selected employee. The Honourable Supreme Court, as well as this Court, has prohibited replacement of one set of temporary employees, who continued in service for several years, without the aid or interference of any court order, by another set of temporary employees. The High Court of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh has interdicted the Corporation from replacing the temporary employees by another set of temporary employees. Hence, Exhibit P- 5 may be quashed, and it may be declared that the petitioners can continue in their present occupation until they are replaced by properly selected permanent employees, pursuant to a valid recruitment.

6. The respondents 1 to 5 have filed a counter affidavit. In addition to refuting the allegations in the writ petition, they have, inter a