Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/18 vs The State Of Assam And 10 Ors on 7 March, 2025
Author: Michael Zothankhuma
Bench: Michael Zothankhuma
Page No.# 1/18
GAHC010018742023
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/864/2023
BIDYA CHAKRAVORTY AND 23 ORS
W/O MRINMOY SARMA
R/ NABAGRAHA ROAD, JNB BYE LANE,
HOUSE NO. 1, SILPUKHURI
GUWAHATI-781003.
2: SHYAMAL KRISHNA ROY
S/O UTTAM KUMAR ROY
R/O S.P. ROAD
KARIMGANJ
DIST. KARIMGANJ
ASSAM
PIN-788713
3: KOHENOOR BARBHUIYA
D/O SRI TAJ UDDIN
BORBHUIYA
R/O MEHRAB ALI LANE
CHAMRAGUDAM
P.O. AND DIST. SILCHAR
ASSAM
PIN-788001
4: ALASH BARUAH
S/O LATE BHOBESH BARUAH
R/O KENDUGURI
P.O. CHENGALI GAON
DIST. JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785010
Page No.# 2/18
5: ANTARIP P HAZARIKA
S/O SRI PROBHAT CH. HAZARIKA
R/O DHEKORGORAH
NEAR NORTH WEST DHEKORGORAH
NEAR NORTH WEST DEVELOPMENT BLOCK
P.O. DHEKORGORAH
DIST. JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785015
6: HIMANSHU SHARMA PATHOK
S/O SRI MRIGENDRA PATHAK
R/O JOGDUAR NARENG PACANI GAON
TEOK
P.O. JOGDUAR
DIST.JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785112.
7: PANKAJ PROTIM HAZARIKA
S/O SRI DHANIRAM HAZARIKA
R/O MALOW ALI
AMLOKHI TOL PATH
P.O. AND DIST. JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785001
8: KAUSHIK BURAGOHAIN
S/O SRI CHANDAN BURAGOHAIN
LICHUBARI CHARIALI
OPP. FLAG STAFF HOUSE
P.O. AND DIST. JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785008
9: BHRIGUPOTI HAZARIKA
S/O SRI JITEN HAZARIKA
R/O AJANTA NAOWSALIA GAON
P.S. PULIBAR
DIST. JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785006
10: ANGSHUMAN BORA
S/O SRI BIJIT BORA
Page No.# 3/18
R/O BORIGAON
SIDING
P.O. AND DIST. JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785001
11: SUSHMITA BORGOHAIN
D/O SRI AJIT BORGOHAIN
R/O DEMOW SUKANPUKHURI GOHAIN GAON
P.O. NOHAT
DIST. SIVASAGAR
ASSAM
PIN-785662
12: MANOJ BORA
S/O RUDRAKANTA BORA
R/O NO. 2 BAMUN GAON
CHEGALI GAON
JORHAT
PIN-785010
13: BHAGYASHREE DEKA
D/O BINAY DEKA
R/O LICHUBARI
NEAR HHMI SCHOOL
JORHAT
PIN-785001
14: PALLAB KUMAR SAIKIA
S/O LATE BIREN SAIKIA
R/O POTIA GAON
JORHAT
PIN-785101
15: PRANJAL SAIKIA
S/O BHUBAN CHANDRA SAIKIA
R/O TEOK JAKHARIA
JORHAT
PIN-785112
16: SIKHA SWARNAKAR
D/O SRI BIJOY KUMAR SWARNAKAR
R/O TARAJAN DCB ROAD
OPPOSITE TO ROYAL OAK HIGH SCHOOL
(KANTHIRAM BORAH PATH) JORHAT
PIN-785001
Page No.# 4/18
17: DEEPIKA TAYE
D/O PUNYA RAM TAYE
R/O ONGC COLONY
Q. NO. C-43
SIVASAGAR
PIN-785697
18: MENONJYOTI KALITA
S/O LATE CHIDANANDA KALITA
R/O GARAMUR KUMAR GAON
LMTC ROAD
JORHAT
PIN-785007
19: SWATI SINGH
D/O DINA NATH SINGH
R/O DEVI POKHARI SHIV MANDIR
TINSUKIA
PIN-786125
20: SUSMITA SAIKIA
D/O LATE HOREN SAIKIA
R/OMAJULI COLLEGE ROAD
KAMALABARI
MAJULI
PIN-785106
21: AKTAR GONI CHOUDHURY
S/O ABUL HUSSAIN CHOUDHURY R/O TUNDUR KANDI
P.O. AND P.S. SONAI
MUKH
DIST. CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN-788119
22: PARTHA PRATIM PAUL
S/O PRADIP KUMAR PAUL
R/O H/NO. 27
ITKHOLA
SUKHODAPALLY
SILCHAR
DIST. CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN-788001
Page No.# 5/18
23: AMIM MAZUMDER
W/O MOHAMMED ALI BARBHUIYA
R/O VILL- ATHAIBASTI
P.O. -SMC GHUNGOOR
DIST. CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN-788014
24: HAMMAD SYDI LASKAR
S/O NAZIM UDDN LASKAR
R/O VILL- BALIGHAT
P.O. ARUNACHAL
SILCHAR
DIST. CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN-78802
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 10 ORS.
REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, HIGHER EDUCATION
(TECHNICAL) DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6.
2:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
HIGHER EDUCATION (TECHNICAL) DEPARTMENT
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-6.
3:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY
TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-6.
4:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
HIGHER EDUCATION (TECHNICAL) DEPARTMENT
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-6.
5:DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION
KAHILIPARA
GUWAHATI
ASSAM
PIN-781019
Page No.# 6/18
6:THE PRINCIPAL
ASSAM ENGINEERING INSTITUTE
CHANDMARI
GUWAHATI
ASSAM
PIN-781003
7:THE PRINCIPAL
KARIMGANJ POLYTECHNIC
MAIZGRAM
DIST. KARIMGANJ
ASSAM
PIN-788710
8:THE PRINCIPAL
HRH THE PRINCE OF WALES INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING AND
TECHNOLOGY
JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785001
9:THE PRINCIPAL
SIVASAGAR POLYTECHNIC
DIMOW
DIST. SIVASAGAR
ASSAM
PIN-787059
10:THE PRINCIPAL
JORHAT INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (JIST)
JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785010
11:THE PRINCIPAL
SILCHAR POLYTECHNIC
MEHERPUR
DIST. CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN-78801
Page No.# 7/18
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
For the petitioners : Mr. D. Das ... Sr. Advocate.
Mr. K. Mohammed .... Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. K. Gogoi. ... Advocate.
Date of hearing : 03.03.2025
Date of Judgment : 07.03.2025
JUDGMENT AND ORDER (CAV)
1. Heard Mr. D. Das, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. K. Mohammed,
learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Gogoi, learned counsel for
the State respondents.
2. The 24 petitioners' case is that they have been appointed as Guests/Part-
time Lecturers in the Polytechnics and Engineering Colleges of Assam and due
to their long engagement, the respondent authorities should be directed to
formulate a scheme for regularisation of their services, by absorbing them in the
sanctioned posts of Lecturers in the respective Polytechnics and Engineering
Colleges.
3. The petitioners' counsel submits that though the present case is covered
by the judgments dismissing the batch of writ petitions, the lead case being
WP(C) 159/2025 (Pramila Kumari Prajapati and 34 others Vs. State of Assam
and 4 others) and in WP(C) 8073/2019 (Rahul Amin Reza and 15 others Vs.
State of Assam and 4 others), which have been upheld by the Division Bench in
Page No.# 8/18
WA NO.49/2025 and WA 47/2025 respectively, the case of some of the
petitioners, for example petitioner nos.12, 14, 15 & 20 are slightly different
from the case of the other writ petitioners.
4. The petitioners' counsel submits that the petitioner No. 12 is a Guest/Part-
time Assistant Professor/Lecturer in Mathematics in Jorhat Institute of Science
and Technology (JIST) on contractual basis. Similarly, the petitioner Nos.1, 2, 7,
11 & 14 are Assistant Professors in Chemistry, while the petitioner Nos.5, 6 & 15
are Assistant Professors in Physics. The petitioner No. 20 is an Assistant
Professor in Chemistry. They are all Guest/Part-time Faculty Members engaged
on contractual basis in JIST even till today.
5. The petitioners' counsel submits that while the State respondents have
initiated a selection process through advertisement, for filling up the vacant
sanctioned posts of Assistant Professor/Lecturers (Technical) and (Non-
Technical) on regular basis, in the various Polytechnics and Engineering Colleges
of Assam, the respondents are now seeking to terminate the services of all the
petitioners. However, petitioner Nos. 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 11, 12, 14, 15 & 20 posts
cannot be said to be included within the posts of term Lecturers (Non-
Technical), as they belong to the science stream.
6. The petitioners' counsel submits that some of the petitioners belong to the
Science stream, which is a completely different stream from Lecturers
(Technical) and (Non-Technical). He submits that the post of Lecturers
(Technical) is for those persons, who have a degree in Engineering. The post of
Assistant Professor/Lecturer (Non-Technical) would be for those persons who do
not have Engineering degrees and those persons in the Science stream. He
Page No.# 9/18
submits that the subjects Mathematics, Chemistry and Physics belongs to the
Science Stream and the same cannot be included in the posts of Assistant
Professor/Lecturer (Non-Technical).
7. Mr. K. Gogoi, learned counsel for the State respondents, on the other hand,
submits that the subjects, Mathematics, Chemistry, and Physics, all belong to
the Non-Technical stream, along with Humanities, Commerce and English etc.
He submits that there are only two streams in the various Polytechnics and
Engineering Colleges of Assam, i.e., Technical and Non-Technical. The Technical
Stream consist of those subjects providing Engineering degrees and the
remaining subjects are all included within the Non-Technical stream.
8. Mr. K. Gogoi also submits that the present case is covered by the judgment
and orders passed by this Court in WP(C) Nos. 159/2025 and 8073/2019, which
have been upheld by the Division bench of this Court in WA Nos. 49/2025 and
47/2025 respectively. As such, the writ petition should be dismissed.
9. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties.
10. As can be seen from the submissions made by the learned counsels for the
parties and from the pleadings, the writ petitioners are all engaged on
contractual basis as Guest/Part-time Lecturers/Assistant Professors (Technical)
and (Non-Technical). The order dated 17.02.2023 passed by this Court in this
case, shows that an interim order had been issued by this Court, directing that
the services of the petitioners should not be disturbed without the leave of this
Court. As such, the service of all the petitioners who have been engaged on
contractual basis have had their service protected in terms of the interim order
Page No.# 10/18
dated 17.02.2023 passed by this Court. In terms of the chart made in para 5 of
the writ petition, none of the writ petitioners, except for the writ petition no. 12,
had 10 years of contractual service at the time of issuance of the interim order
dated 17.02.2023 by this Court.
11. Another set of writ petitioners in a batch of writ petitions, i.e. WP(C)
159/2025, WP(C) 8795/2019, WP(C) 157/2025 and WP(C) 8073/2019, who
were Guest/Part-time Faculty Members of various Polytechnics and Barak Valley
Engineering College, had prayed for regularisation of their service, on the
ground that they had worked for a number of years against vacant sanctioned
posts.
12. This Court while considering the above writ petitions, had noted the fact
that the engagement of the petitioners therein as Guest/Part-time Faculty
Members had been protected, vide interim orders passed by this Court, prior to
completing 10 years of service. It had also been noted that the challenge made
to the Advertisement dated 30.12.2024, for filling up the vacant posts of
Lecturers (Technical) and (Non-Technical) on regular basis, in the Polytechnics
and in Barak Valley Engineering College was without merit, inasmuch as, the
petitioners therein could have applied and participated in the selection process
for filling up the said posts on regular basis. This Court has also noticed the fact
that one writ petition, i.e., WP(C) 2089/2020 had been filed challenging the
advertisement dated 25.05.2017, for filling up the post of Guest/Part-Time
Lecturers (Technical) and (Non-Technical) on regular basis, on the ground that
the services of the petitioners therein should be regularized against those
advertised posts. This Court, vide it's judgment and order dated 02.07.2024
passed in WP(C) 2089/2020 had set aside the Advertisement dated 25.05.2017
Page No.# 11/18
for filling up the posts of Lecturers (Technical) and (Non-Technical), due to the
fact that the Assam Technical Education Service Rules, 1981 (hereinafter
referred to "1981 Rules"), which empowered the Assam Public Service
Commission (APSC) to conduct the selection process, had been amended in the
year 2020 and the said power to conduct the selection process had
subsequently been given to the Assam Engineering Services Recruitment Board.
This Court, vide the said judgment and order dated 02.07.2024 passed in WP(C)
2089/2020, gave liberty to the State respondents to take appropriate steps to fill
up the said 113 regular vacant posts of Lecturers (Technical) and 86 regular
vacant posts of Lecturers (Non-Technical), which had been advertised in the
advertisement dated 25.05.2017, in accordance with the amended 1981 Rules.
13. Consequent to the above judgment and order dated 02.07.2024 passed in
WP(C) 2089/2020, the State respondents issued advertisement dated
30.12.2024, for filling up the 113 posts of Lecturers (technical) and 86 posts of
Lecturers (non-technical), which were advertised in the earlier advertisement
dated 25.05.2017. The same was put to challenge by the petitioners in WP(C)
159/2025, WP(C) 8795/2019, WP(C) 157/2025 and WP(C) 8073/2019. However,
no one had challenged the order dated 02.07.2024 passed in WP(C) 2089/2020.
14. This Court dismissed the above WP(C) 159/2025, WP(C) 8795/2019, WP(C)
157/2025 and WP(C) 8073/2019, on the ground that the judgment and order
dated 02.07.2024 passed in WP(C) 2089/2020 had attained finality. As such, the
challenge made by the petitioners therein to the Advertisement dated
30.12.2024 for filling up the post of Assistant Professors/Lecturers (Technical)
and (Non-Technical), which was made in respect of the same vacant posts
Page No.# 12/18
advertised on 25.05.2017 pursuant to the judgment and order passed in WP(C)
2089/2020 was held to be not sustainable. Further, the petitioners therein could
not claim regularization as they had not worked for 10 years and that they
continued to be in service on the basis of the protection of an interim order
passed by this Court. Thus, this Court held that the regularization of the service
of the petitioners therein did not come within the conditions laid down by the
Supreme Court in the case of State of Karnatake vs. Uma Devi (3),
reported in (2006) 4 SCC 1 and in the case of State of Karnatake & Others
vs. M.L. Kesari & Others, reported in (2010) 9 SCC 247. This Court
accordingly dismissed the writ petitions. The writ petitioners therein put to
challenge the judgments passed in WP(C) 159/2025, WP(C) 8795/2019, WP(C)
157/2025 and WP(C) 8073/2019 by way of WA 49/2025 and WA 47/2025. WA
49/2025 was dismissed vide judgment and order dated 25.02.2025, while WA
47/2025 was dismissed vide judgment and order dated 25.02.2025.
15. In the case of Umadevi (3) (supra), which was decided on 10.04.2006,
the Supreme Court has held that a temporary, contractual, casual or daily wage
employees does not have a legal right to be made permanent, unless they have
been appointed in terms of the relevant Rules or in adherence to Article 14 & 16
of the Constitution. However, the Supreme Court in paragraph No. 53 of Uma
Devi (3) (supra), had directed the Union of India, the State Governments and
their instrumentalities to take steps for regularization as a "one-time measure",
the services of irregularly appointed persons, who had worked for 10 years or
more in duly sanctioned posts, but not under the cover of the orders of the
Courts or of Tribunals. Paragraph No. 53 of the judgment of the Supreme Court
in Uma Devi (3) (supra) was thereafter clarified by the Supreme Court in the
case of State of Karnataka & Others Vs. M.L. Kesari, reported in 2010 9
Page No.# 13/18
SCC 247, wherein it held that an exception to the general principles against the
regularization was allowed in Uma Devi (3) (supra), if the following
conditions were fulfilled.
"(i) The employee concerned should have worked for 10 years or more in duly
sanctioned post without the benefit or protection of the interim order of any court or
tribunal. In other words, the State Government or its instrumentality should have
employed the employee and continued him in service voluntarily and continuously for
more than ten years. (ii) the appointment of such employee should not be illegal,
even if irregular. Where the appointments are not made or continued against
sanctioned posts or where the persons appointed do not possess the prescribed
minimum qualifications, the appointments will be considered to be illegal. But where
the person employed possessed the prescribed qualifications and was working against
sanctioned post, but had been selected without undergoing the process of open
competitive selection, such appointments are considered to be irregular".
16. This Court had also observed in the above disposed off cases that an
advertisement for filling up the post of Assistant Professors/Lecturers
(Technical)/(Non-Technical) had been issued in the Advertisement dated
21.02.2023 and as the petitioners in the above four disposed off cases, namely,
WP(C) 159/2025, WP(C) 8795/2019, WP(C) 157/2025 and WP(C) 8073/2019
had participated in the selection process, for regular appointment in terms of
the Advertisement dated 21.02.2023, the petitioners therein had waived their
right to claim regularization of their services.
17. As can be seen from the above facts, the petitioners' case for
regularization also does not come within the conditions laid down by the
Supreme Court in Umadevi (3) (supra) and M.L. Kesari (supra), wherein an
employee could be considered for regularization, if he had worked for 10 years
Page No.# 14/18
or more in a duly sanctioned post, without the benefit or protection of an
interim order of any Court or Tribunal. In the present case, the petitioners
are still working as Guest/Part Time Lecturers on the basis of the protection
given vide interim order dated 17.02.2023. When the Constitution Bench of the
Supreme Court in Umadevi (3) (supra) does not allow for counting of the
services of contractual employees under the protection of an order of a Court
for the purpose of regularization, the petitioners cannot claim regularization on
the ground that they have worked continuously as Guest/Part-Time Lecturers for
a period beyond the requirement of the State respondents. The petitioners
should have participated in the selection process pursuant to the advertisements
issued for filling up the posts of Assistant Professor/Lecturer on regular basis.
18. With regard to the issue as to whether some of the petitioners belong to a
different stream other than the Technical or Non-Technical stream, when
compared to the other writ petitioners, on account of them being
Lecturers/Assistant Professors in Mathematics, Chemistry and Physics, this Court
finds that the answer lies in the advertisement No. AESRB-02/2023 dated
21.02.2023 issued by the Assam Engineering Service Recruitment Board which
has been made an Annexure in WP(C) 4819/2023. The stand of some of the
petitioners that they belong to a different class altogether, i.e, the Science
Stream, which is different from the Technical or Non-Technical stream is belied
by the Advertisement AESRB-02/2023 dated 21.02.2023. The Advertisement
AESRB-02/2023 dated 21.02.2023 shows that the State respondents have
considered the subjects of Mathematics, Chemistry and Physics to be in the
Non-Technical Stream. The extract of the Advertisement AESRB-02/2023 dated
21.02.2023 is reproduced hereinbelow, as follows :-
Page No.# 15/18
Adv. No. AESRB-02/2023
ASSAM ENGINEERING SERVICE RECRUITMENT BOARD
Assam Textile Institute Campus, Ambari, Guwahati-781001
___________________________________________________________
No.AESRB/023/2022/249 Date:21/02/2023
NOTICE
Assam Engineering Service Recruitment Board (AESRB) invites online application in the
website (https://www.aesrb.in) from the permanent residents of Assam and having requisite
qualification for recruitment to the vacant posts of Assistant Professor (Non-Technical)
in the State Engineering Colleges under the Higher (Technical) Education Department,
Government of Assam, as indicated below:
Name of post : Assistant Professor (Non-Technical) in
the Government Engineering Colleges of Assam
Number of vacant posts : 46 (Forty Six)
Sl. Assistant UR OBC/MOBC SC ST(P) ST(H) Grand Total Post Post reserved
No Professor (Non- reserved for Ex-Service
Technical) in for men
Total RFW Total RFW Total RFW Total RFW Total RFW Total RFW PwBD
1. Physics 8 2 4 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 14 3 - -
2. Chemistry 5 2 3 1 1 0 2 1 1 0 12 4 - -
3. Mathematics 4 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 6 1 - -
4. English 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 - -
5. Humanities 8 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 9 2 - -
(Commerce)
6. Geology 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 - -
Total 28 8 9 2 3 0 4 1 2 0 46 11 0 0
19. The above advertisement No. ASERB-02/2023 dated 21.02.2023 clearly
shows that the State respondents have considered the posts of Assistant
Professor/Lecturer (Non-Technical) to also include the following subjects:
(i) Physics
(ii) Chemistry
(iii) Mathematics
(iv) English
(v) Humanities (Commerce)
(vi) Geology.
Page No.# 16/18
In view of the above, it is clear that the subjects Mathematics, Chemistry
and Physics cannot be said to be in a different stream, as these subjects come
within the Non-Technical stream.
20. Page 56 of the writ petition is the order dated 06.06.2015 issued by the
Principal, JIST, which shows that the petitioner no.12 was appointed as
Assistant Professor of Mathematics Teacher in the JIST on contract basis and
that JIST had recognized his offer of sincere service to JIST since August 2011
with a nominal salary till 06.06.2015. The order dated 06.06.2015 issued by the
Principal JIST states as follows:
"No. JIST/01/Estt/2015/274-E Dated: 06/06/2015
ORDER
In pursuance of the pending approval of the Governing Body of JIST the undersigned is pleased to appoint Mr. Manoj Bora as an Assistant Professor in Mathematics Department in Jorhat Institute of Science & Technology, Jorhat on contract basis. This institute is highly recognized his sincere service offering to this institute since August 2011 with a nominal salary till date. Accordingly Mr. Bora is asked to continue his duties for next academic session until further order. This appointment is purely temporary may be terminated at any time. The salary and other facilities will be paid as per government rule."
21. The above order has been issued on 06.06.2015 and there is no document submitted by the petitioner no.12, showing that the petitioner no.12 had been appointed as Assistant Professor in JIST prior to 06.06.2015 on contract basis. The order dated 06.06.2015 only states that the petitioner no.12 had been offering his service since August 2011 on nominal salary. There is nothing to show that the petitioner no.12 was issued any appointment order as a Page No.# 17/18 Guest/Part-time Faculty Member prior to the order dated 06.06.2015. In fact the State respondents' counsel submits that the petitioner no.12 worked only from 01.08.2015, which would mean that the petitioner No.12 also has not worked for 10 years on contract basis, prior to coming to this Court.
22. Be that as it may, the Supreme Court in the case of Ganesh Digamber Jambhrunkar & ors. vs. State of Maharashtra & ors., reported in 2023 SCC Online SC 1417, after noticing it's decision in the case of Sheo Narain Nagar & ors. v. State of U.P. & ors. , reported in (2018) 13 SCC 432, has held that long period of work on contractual basis by a person, does not create any legal right on the part of the concerned person engaged on contractual basis to be absorbed, when there was no scheme for regularization. In the present case also, there is apparently no scheme for regularization of the petitioners. The operative portion of the decision taken by the Supreme Court in Ganesh Digamber Jambhrunkar & ors.(supra) states as follows:-
"3. The issue with which we are concerned in this petition is as to whether by working for a long period of time on contractual basis, the petitioners have acquired any vested legal right to be appointed in the respective posts on regular basis.
4. We appreciate the argument of the petitioners that they have given best part of their life for the said college but so far as law is concerned, we do not find their continuous working has created any legal right in their favour to be absorbed. In the event there was any scheme for such regularization, they could have availed of such scheme but in this case, there seems to be none. We are also apprised that some of the petitioners have applied for appointment through the current recruitment process. The High Court has rejected their claim mainly on the ground that they have no right to seek regularization of their service. We do not think any Page No.# 18/18 different view can be taken."
23. In view of the above decision of the Supreme Court, this Court is of the view that the contractual engagement of the petitioner no.12 does not enclothe him with any vested legal right to have his service regularized.
24. As the case of the petitioners herein, who either belong to the Technical or Non-Technical stream, are covered by the decision of this Court passed in WP(C) 159/2025, WP(C) 8795/2019, WP(C) 157/2025 and WP(C) 8073/2019, which have been upheld by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A. 49/2025 and W.A. 47/2025, this Court does not find any ground to allow the writ petition.
25. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant