Page No.# 1/25 GAHC010154062025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/2241/2025 THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BARPETA DISTRICT, BARPETA ASSAM 2: DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPERTMENT BARPETA UTTAR BARPETA ASSA VERSUS FARUK ALI AHMED SO LATE BADSHA MIAH, RO VILLAGE SUHABIL DALANI, PO PALHAZI, PS AND DISTRICT BARPETA, ASSAM 781309 2:SUFIMA AKTAR DO IMAM HUSSAIN RO VILL SUHABIL DALANI PO PAL HAZI PS AND DISTRICT BARPETA ASSAM 3:SHAHADAT ALI SO SAYED ALI RO VILL DANA KUCHI PO SON KUCHI PS AND DISTRICT BARPETA ASSAM 4:JEHERUL ISLAM SO FARMAN ALI RO VILL PACHIM ALADI Page No.# 2/25 PO RAULY PS SARTHEBARI DISTRICT BARPETA ASSAM 5:ELIZA KHANOM DO BANIZ KHAN RO VILL PACHIM ALADI PO RAULY PS SARTHEBARI DISTRICT BARPETA ASSAM 6:FARHANA SULTANA DO BAKSHI GULAM MAHADDAM RO VILL AND PO MANDIA DISTRICT BARPETA ASSAM 7:ASMINA KHATUN DO FARMAN ALI RO VILL KALAHBHANGA NH 31 PO AND DISTRICT BARPETA ASSAM 8:SAJIDUL ISLAM BULBUL SO GOLAM ROBBANI RO DEWRIKUCHI PO SONKUCHI PS AND DIST BARPETA ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : ADDL. SR. GA, ASSAM, MS. M BHATTACHARJEE Advocate for the Respondent : MR. A DAS, MR R HOQUE Linked Case : WP(C)/3482/2025 RUMI AKTARA Page No.# 3/25 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA WOMEN AND CHILD SHASTRI BHAWAN NEW DELHI-01 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 ASSAM 3:THE DIRECTOR OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT ASSAM M.G. ROAD UZAN BAZAR GUWAHATI-781001. 4:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781301 5:THE ADDL DISTRICT COMMISSIONER (SOCIAL WELFARE ) BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781301 6:THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT GOVT OF ASSAM CUM BRANCH INCHARGE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF SHAKTI SADAN M.G. ROAD UZAN BAZAR GUWAHATI-781001. 7:THE DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BARPETA UTTAR BARPETA Page No.# 4/25 PIN-781301. ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : Advocate for : DY.S.G.I. appearing for THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS Linked Case : WP(C)/3478/2025 ELIZA KHANOM VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 ASSAM 3:THE DIRECTOR OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT ASSAM M.G. ROAD UZAN BAZAR GUWAHATI-781001. 4:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781301 5:THE ADDL DISTRICT COMMISSIONER (SOCIAL WELFARE ) BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781301 6:THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT GOVT OF ASSAM CUM BRANCH INCHARGE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF SHAKTI SADAN Page No.# 5/25 M.G. ROAD UZAN BAZAR GUWAHATI-781001. 7:THE DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BARPETA UTTAR BARPETA PIN-781301. ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MR A DAS Advocate for : DY.S.G.I. appearing for THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS Linked Case : WP(C)/3480/2025 SHAHADAT ALI S/O- SAYED ALI R/O- VILL- DANA KUCHI P.O- SONKUCHI P.S AND DIST-BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781314 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA WOMEN AND CHILD SHASTRI BHAWAN NEW DELHI-01 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 ASSAM 3:THE DIRECTOR OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT ASSAM M.G. ROAD UZAN BAZAR Page No.# 6/25 GUWAHATI-781001. 4:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781301 5:THE ADDL DISTRICT COMMISSIONER (SOCIAL WELFARE ) BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781301 6:THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT GOVT OF ASSAM CUM BRANCH INCHARGE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF SHAKTI SADAN M.G. ROAD UZAN BAZAR GUWAHATI-781001. 7:THE DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BARPETA UTTAR BARPETA PIN-781301. ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : Advocate for : DY.S.G.I. appearing for THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS Linked Case : WP(C)/3476/2025 SUFIMA AKTAR VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DISPUR Page No.# 7/25 GUWAHATI-06 ASSAM 3:THE DIRECTOR OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT ASSAM M.G. ROAD UZAN BAZAR GUWAHATI-781001. 4:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781301 5:THE ADDL DISTRICT COMMISSIONER (SOCIAL WELFARE ) BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781301 6:THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT GOVT OF ASSAM CUM BRANCH INCHARGE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF SHAKTI SADAN M.G. ROAD UZAN BAZAR GUWAHATI-781001. 7:THE DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BARPETA UTTAR BARPETA PIN-781301. ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MR A DAS Advocate for : DY.S.G.I. appearing for THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS Linked Case : WP(C)/1665/2025 FARUK ALI AHMED 2: SUFIMA AKTAR Page No.# 8/25 D/O- IMAM HUSSAIN R/O- VILLAGE- SUHABIL DALANI P.O- PAL HAZI P.S AND DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781309 3: SHAHADAT ALI S/O- SAYED ALI R/O- VILLAGE- DANA KUCHI P.O- SON KUCHI P.S AND DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781314 4: JEHERUL ISLAM S/O- FARMAN ALI R/O- VILLAGE- PACHIM ALADI P.O- RAULY P.S-SARTHEBARI AND DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781311 5: ELIZA KHANOM D/O- BANIZ KHAN R/O- VILLAGE- PACHIM ALADI P.O- RAULY P.S-SARTHEBARI AND DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781311 6: FARHANA SULTAN D/O- BAKSHI GULAM MAHADDAM R/O- VILLAGE AND P.O- MANDIA DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781308 7: ASMINA KHATUN D/O- FARMAN ALI Page No.# 9/25 R/O- VILLAGE- KALAHBHANGA NH 31 P.O AND DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781315 8: SAJIDUL ISLAM BULBUL S/O- GOLAM ROBBANI R/O- DEWRIKUCHI P.O- SONKUCHI P.S AND DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781314 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI-6. 3:THE DIRECTOR OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT ASSAM M.G. ROAD UZAN BAZAR GUWAHATI-781001. 4:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781301 5:THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT UZANBAZAR GUWAHATI-781001. 6:THE DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BARPETA PIN-781301 Page No.# 10/25 ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MR A DAS Advocate for : DY.S.G.I. appearing for THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS Linked Case : WP(C)/3484/2025 JEHERUL ISLAM S/O- FARMAN ALI R/O- VILL- PASCHIM ALADI P.O- RAULY P.S- SARTHEBARI DIST-BARPETA ASSAM VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA WOMEN AND CHILD SHASTRI BHAWAN NEW DELHI-01 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 ASSAM 3:THE DIRECTOR OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT ASSAM M.G. ROAD UZAN BAZAR GUWAHATI-781001. 4:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781301 5:THE ADDL DISTRICT COMMISSIONER (SOCIAL WELFARE ) BARPETA Page No.# 11/25 ASSAM PIN-781301 6:THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT GOVT OF ASSAM CUM BRANCH INCHARGE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF SHAKTI SADAN M.G. ROAD UZAN BAZAR GUWAHATI-781001. 7:THE DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BARPETA UTTAR BARPETA PIN-781301. ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : Advocate for : DY.S.G.I. appearing for THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS Linked Case : WP(C)/3485/2025 SAJIDUL ISLAM BULBUL VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA WOMEN AND CHILD SHASTRI BHAWAN NEW DELHI-01 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 ASSAM 3:THE DIRECTOR OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT ASSAM M.G. ROAD Page No.# 12/25 UZAN BAZAR GUWAHATI-781001. 4:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781301 5:THE ADDL DISTRICT COMMISSIONER (SOCIAL WELFARE ) BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781301 6:THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT GOVT OF ASSAM CUM BRANCH INCHARGE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF SHAKTI SADAN M.G. ROAD UZAN BAZAR GUWAHATI-781001. 7:THE DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BARPETA UTTAR BARPETA PIN-781301. ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MR A DAS Advocate for : DY.S.G.I. appearing for THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS Linked Case : WP(C)/3479/2025 FARUK ALI AHMED S/O- LATE BADSHA MIAH R/O- VILLAGE- SUHABIL DALANI P.O- PAL HAZI P.S AND DIST-BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781309 VERSUS Page No.# 13/25 THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 ASSAM 3:THE DIRECTOR OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT ASSAM M.G. ROAD UZAN BAZAR GUWAHATI-781001. 4:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781301 5:THE ADDL DISTRICT COMMISSIONER (SOCIAL WELFARE ) BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781301 6:THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT GOVT OF ASSAM CUM BRANCH INCHARGE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF SHAKTI SADAN M.G. ROAD UZAN BAZAR GUWAHATI-781001. 7:THE DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BARPETA UTTAR BARPETA PIN-781301. ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MR A DAS Advocate for : DY.S.G.I. appearing for THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS Page No.# 14/25 Linked Case : WP(C)/1722/2025 RUMI AKTARA VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS. 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM BLOCK-D 1ST FLOOR JANATA BHAWAN DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 ASSAM 3:THE DIRECTOR WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM UZAN BAZAR GUWAHATI-781001 ASSAM 4:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BARPETA ASSAM 781301 5:THE JOINT DIRECTOR WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM CUM BRANCH IN CHARGE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF SHAKTI SADAN UZAN BAZAR GUWAHATI-781001 ASSAM 6:THE DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BARPETA UTTAR BARPETA PIN-781301 Page No.# 15/25 ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MR. P DEKA Advocate for : DY.S.G.I. appearing for THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS. BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER 16.09.2025 Heard Mr. G.N. Sahewalla, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. P. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. M. Bhattacharjee, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for the respondents. 2. These writ petitions are filed by the petitioners who were serving in various capacities :- petitioner no. 1 – Faruk Ali Ahmed (in WP(C) No. 1665/2025 and WP(C) No. 3479/2025) joining on 01.03.2019 as Office Assistant, petitioner no. 2 – Sufima Aktar (in WP(C) No. 1665/2025 and WP(C) No. 3476/2025) joining on 01.03.2019 as Multipurpose Worker, petitioner no. 3 – Shahadat Ali (in WP(C) No. 1665/2025 and WP(C) No. 3480/2025) joining on 01.10.2021 as Security Guard, petitioner no. 4 – Jeherul Islam (in WP(C) No. 1665/2025 and WP(C) No. 3484/2025) joining on 07.04.2022 as Security Guard, petitioner no. 5 – Eliza Khanom (in WP(C) No. 1665/2025 and WP(C) No. 3478) joining on 07.04.2022 as Multipurpose Worker, petitioner no. 6 – Farhana Sultan (in WP(C) No. 1665/2025) joining on 01.09.2022 as Counsellor, petitioner no. 7 – Asmina Khatun (in WP(C) No. 1665/2025) joining on 01.09.2022 as Case Worker, petitioner no. 8 – Sajidul Islam Bulbul (in WP(C) No. 1665/2025 and WP(C) No. 3485/2025) joining on Page No.# 16/25 01.04.2023 as Security Guard and petitioner no. 9 – Rumi Aktara (in WP(C) No. 1722/2025 and WP(C) No. 3482/2025) joining on 01.03.2019 as Case Worker under the ‘Sakhi’ One Stop Centres (OSCs) which was earlier operated by the NGO namely North East Voluntary Association of Rural Development (NEVARD). Their appointments were all contractual which were issued by the said NGO. Subsequently, under the “Mission Shakti” Scheme, which is a pilot project of the Ministry of Women and Child Development, Government of India, New Delhi, these Centres were set up and operated through the NGOs. In the district of Barpeta, the centre was operated by the NGO NEVARD. The petitioners were appointed through various appointment orders issued by the NGO, NEVARD, and were engaged on a contractual basis. Subsequently, the supervision of these One Stop Centres were taken over by the District Social Welfare Officers in accordance with directions issued by the appropriate Government. By communication dated 26.02.2024, the Director of Women and Child Development, Assam, instructed the District Social Welfare Officers of all districts to proceed for taking charge of these One Stop Centres and to initiate the recruitment of staff. Pursuant to this, the Director of Women and Child Development constituted a District Level Selection Committee, with the Additional District Commissioner as Chairman, and the District Social Welfare Officers and Child Development Project Officer as members, with the latter serving as Member Secretary. 3. Thereafter, an advertisement was issued on 04.03.2025 inviting applications for temporary and contractual appointments at the One Stop Centres (OSCs) in Page No.# 17/25 Barpeta under the “Mission Shakti” scheme. The advertisement stated that applications were invited from eligible candidates to fulfill the prescribed eligibility criteria for various categories of purely temporary, contractual posts at the One Stop Centres under “Mission Shakti” for Barpeta District. 4. The petitioners, who were engaged in various capacities at the One Stop Centres in Barpeta District, apprehended that their services would be terminated in view of the advertisement issued for fresh recruitment. Accordingly, they approached this Court by filing WP(C) No. 1665/2025 and WP(C) No. 1722/2025. The Coordinate Bench, by order dated 25.03.2025, while issuing notice, declined to grant their interim relief. However, it was clarified that the petitioners’ appointments would not be disturbed without serving them a 60 days prior notice as per the terms and conditions of their contracts, provided they were still functioning at the ‘Sakhi’ One Stop Centres in Barpeta District. Subsequently, the petitioners filed Writ Appeal No. 205/2025, which was later withdrawn. Pursuant to the liberty granted by this Court, the respondents issued 60 days termination notices to the employees named therein from the ‘Sakhi’ One Stop Centres, Barpeta. All the notices were issued on 29.04.2025 and which came to be challenged in WP(C) No. 3476/2025. 5. This Court, by order dated 20.06.2025, permitted the respondents to proceed with the recruitment process but directed that the termination orders shall not be given effect until the next returnable date. This interim protection was subsequently extended on several occasions. The respondents, being aggrieved by the interim order passed, filed an I.A. Page No.# 18/25 No. 2241/2025 seeking vacation, modification, or alteration of the interim order dated 20.06.2025 and 27.06.2025 respectively. The pleadings in the matter have been exchanged. Subsequently, all these matters were directed to be listed together and are therefore taken up together for hearing. 6. Mr. G.N. Sahewalla, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. P. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the writ petitioners have been working in these One Stop Centres pursuant to their engagements by the NGO namely NEVARD and they have been rendering their services without any complaint to the satisfaction of all concerned. The primary submission of the learned Senior Counsel is that the entire recruitment process initiated through the advertisement amounts to a mechanism to recruit contractual and/or ad hoc employees to replace the petitioners, who themselves are temporary or ad hoc employees. In support of this argument, reliance was placed on the judgment of the Apex Court in Piara Singh and Others vs. State of Haryana and Others, reported in (1992) 4 SCC 118. 7. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners strenuously submitted that the process of engagement under challenge violates the principle laid down by the Apex Court in Piara Singh (supra), which prohibits the replacement of one ad hoc employee by another ad hoc employee. He further submitted that the writ petitioners were engaged through a due process of selection conducted by the erstwhile NGO, NEVARD, and having been found eligible, their appointments were formalized through separate agreements governing their services. However, with the pilot project now being undertaken by the Government of India as well as the Page No.# 19/25 State of Assam, the operation, supervision, and management of these One Stop Centres have been taken over by the State. Consequently, the petitioners’ services are also required to be taken over by the State. The issuance of termination orders, therefore, not only contravenes the law laid down by the Apex Court in Piara Singh (supra) but is also against public policy. 8. The learned Senior Counsel further submitted that there are no adverse remarks, enquiries, or allegations against any of the petitioners warranting their removal from service. In such circumstances, the termination orders impugned in WP(C) No. 1665/2025 and other connected writ petitions are contrary to law and ought to be set aside and quashed. The petitioners should be permitted to continue in service, with their services subsequently regularized by the Government in accordance with the prescribed legal procedure. 9. Ms. M. Bhattacharjee, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, strongly disputes the submissions made by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners. It is submitted that the entire process has been undertaken in accordance with the policy announced by the Government of India, and the procedure to be adopted by the various State agencies for the supervision, management, and operation of these Centres has been detailed in the scheme implementation guidelines. 10. It is further submitted that the petitioners were appointed by the erstwhile NGO, NEVARD, and it is disputed that any proper selection process was conducted by NEVARD. The State, particularly the District Authorities, in terms of the Scheme, are required to apply the Scheme in its entirety, including the Page No.# 20/25 appointment of staff and personnel in these Centres. It is also submitted that the writ petitioners themselves did not submit any applications offering their candidatures pursuant to the advertisement dated 04.03.2025. There was no restraint by the respondent authorities preventing the petitioners from applying in terms of the said advertisement. Under these circumstances, now that the recruitment process, in view of the liberty granted by the Court, has been undertaken and completed, the authorities are required to make the necessary appointments. Therefore, the interim orders granted by this Court ought to be vacated and the writ petitions dismissed. 11. The learned counsel for the respondent has placed before the Court a judgment of the Central Administrative Tribunal, New Delhi, wherein similar issues were raised, and the learned Tribunal dismissed such petitions. The learned counsel for the respondents therefore submits that the grounds urged before the Tribunal are the same as those raised by the writ petitioners in the present proceedings. In light of the attending facts and circumstances, the prayers made by the writ petitioners before this Court ought not to be granted, and the writ petitions should be dismissed. 12. The learned counsel for the parties have been heard, and the pleadings on record have been carefully perused. The judgments cited at the bar have also been duly noted. 13. At the outset, it is seen that there is no dispute that the writ petitioners are contractual employees serving at the ‘Sakhi’ One Stop Centres in Barpeta District. It is also undisputed that the writ petitioners were engaged by the NGO, NEVARD, Page No.# 21/25 which was operating the One Stop Centres at Barpeta at the relevant time. Pursuant to an order issued by the Director, Women and Child Development, to all Social Welfare Officers, the One Stop Centres were taken over by the District Social Welfare Officer of Barpeta District. Subsequently, an advertisement dated 04.03.2025 was issued inviting applications from eligible candidates to fill the said posts. 14. Before this Court, the petitioners have not placed any material to show that their contractual engagements were valid up to a particular period which is yet to be completed. Moreover, it is not in dispute that the writ petitioners did not submit their applications in response to the advertisement dated 04.03.2025, even though there was no restraint imposed by the respondent authorities or by this Court at any time preventing them from doing so. 15. The proposition urged before this Court by the learned Senior Counsel, relying on Piara Singh (supra), that an ad hoc employee cannot be replaced by another ad hoc employee, is in the context of the removal of a person appointed in an ad hoc capacity to a regular post and their replacement by another employee similarly appointed in an ad hoc capacity. There is no dispute with the principle or the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in Piara Singh (supra). However, in the facts of the present case, the posts in which the writ petitioners were engaged or appointed are not adhoc appointments in sanctioned posts in the Government. Their engagements are purely contractual. These engagements were neither extended nor renewed either by the NGO at the relevant point in time or by the respondent department. The petitioners were Page No.# 22/25 continuing in service only because the recruitment process initiated by the respondent department was underway. For reasons best known to them, the petitioners did not submit their applications in response to the advertisement dated 04.03.2025. 16. The petitioners have not been able to show before this Court any provision or principle under which their rights are crystallized to justify approaching this Court for a writ of certiorari and/or mandamus. It is therefore necessary for the writ Court to examine the locus standi of petitioners seeking such writs. 17. The mere fact that the writ petitioners were engaged as contractual employees by the erstwhile NGO NEVARD cannot be construed as conferring upon them any right to continue in their posts notwithstanding the administration and supervision of the One Stop Centres being taken over by the Government. It is also noted that no challenge was raised at the relevant time questioning the handing over and taking over of the Centres by the Government. 18. In WP(C) No. 1665/2025, the prayer is for setting aside the advertisement and to further restrain the respondents from disturbing the employment of the petitioners. No provisions or guidelines have been placed before this Court to demonstrate that the advertisement issued is contrary to the scheme or guidelines issued by the Government. The only ground urged, as discussed, is that the petitioners are contractual employees and that the advertisement also seeks engagement of contractual employees; hence, replacing one contractual employee with another is in violation to the principle laid down in Piara Singh (supra) that an ad hoc employee cannot be replaced by another ad hoc employee. Page No.# 23/25 19. Catena of Judgments by the Apex Court as well as by this Court has held that a writ in the nature of mandamus can be issued only upon existence of a legal right of the writ petitioner and when corresponding legal duty of the respondent is established. It is only in these circumstances that the discretionary power of a High Court under Article 226 is normally exercised under judicial review. Unless the petitioner can demonstrate the existence of a legal right and also a corresponding duty saddled upon on the respondents and which they have deliberately failed to perform, a writ of mandamus is not called for under such circumstances. 20. Similarly a writ of certiorari willbe issued when the Court does not find the process confirming to law or statute. Certiorari is called for correcting errors of jurisdiction as and when an inferior Court or a Tribunal acts without jurisdiction or in excess thereof or fails to exercise it. Certiorari will also be called for where the Court or the Tribunal decides a matter well within its jurisdiction but without giving any opportunity to the petitioners to be heard or violates any principles of natural justice. Certiorari however is not to be issued by the High Court in a manner so as to substitute itself with the decision making authority while finding fault with the process along with the reason assigned. The principles which can be culled out from the ratios of the Apex Court in a catena of Judgment is that the power under Article 226 of the Constitution is conferred on the High Courts that while exercising judicial review it can issue prerogative writs not only for violation of fundamental rights but also for other purposes as well subject however to the restrictions as discussed above. Page No.# 24/25 21. Coming to the facts of the present case, while the petitioner has prayed for writs of mandamus and certiorari, it is seen that the petitioner has not been able to project any substantive right for continuance of their services as contractual employees or that their services stood terminated without any prior notice or that the advertisement which was issued by the respondent authorities had put restrictions on the petitioners for responding to the said advertisement and offering their candidatures while continuing their services as contractual employees. In fact, in the earlier round of litigations there was a direction by the Court that their services shall not be terminated without issuance of the mandatory notice. The said notice having been issued, the same is under challenge in the present proceedings. The petitioners have also not been able to refer to any of the provisions of the contract or the agreements which they claimed to have executed at the time of their engagement as contractual employees and that their services are sought to be terminated in violation of any of the clauses of such an agreement. 22. Under such circumstances, the writ petitions lack merit and are therefore dismissed. The interim orders passed earlier stand vacated. Consequently, I.A. (Civil) No. 2241/2025 is closed, and all pending interlocutory applications are also dismissed. The respondents are permitted to proceed with the appointment of the selected candidates. Before parting with the matter, this Court directs that any pending salary dues payable to the writ petitioners up to date shall be cleared by the respondent authorities forthwith. Further, in the event that the petitioners apply for future vacancies arising in Page No.# 25/25 the future by way of advertisement, their candidatures shall be considered on merit and subject to fulfillment of all eligibility criteria. The respondent authorities may also consider their experiences they have gained during their services rendered at the ‘Sakhi’ One Stop Centres, Barpeta District, Assam. 23. All writ petitions and I.A.s are disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant