The court directed the relevant authority to address petitioners' representation regarding their employment status under MGNREGS, emphasizing due process and the right to challenge decisions.

JUDGMENT Dated this the 3^rd day of February, 2026 The petitioners, who were working under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS), have filed this writ petition seeking to quash Exts.P2, P3, P6 and P16 and to direct the respondents to issue orders retaining / re-engaging the petitioners in service as Accredited Engineer, Accredited Overseer and Accountant-cum-IT Assistant in Arattupuzha Grama Panchayat, Alappuzha as long as MGNREG Scheme exists.

2. The petitioners would urge that their contracts were validly renewed on 02.08.2024 based on the performance appraisal as evidenced by Ext.P1 and will continue for a period of two years from the date of its renewal i.e., until 02.08.2026. The contract explicitly provides for a two year term. The petitioners had secured more than minimum required score (50%) in their appraisal in accordance with Ext.P8 Government Order. Therefore, the petitioners have a legitimate expectation to continue in service.

3. Be that as it may, from the pleadings, I find that the petitioners have preferred Ext.P23 representation before the 7^th respondent in this regard.

4. In the facts and circumstances of the case, it would be only appropriate that the 7^th respondent considers the grievance of the petitioners at least at the first instance.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing the 7^th respondent to consider Ext.P23 representation and pass appropriate orders thereon within a period of two months after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. Needless to say, the petitioners will be at liberty to challenge the orders that may be passed by the 7^th respondent, if they are so advised.

Sd/-