- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1347 WP No. 203938 of 2024 C/W WP No. 203401 of 2024 WP No. 203403 of 2024 AND 3 OTHERS IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO.203938 OF 2024 (S-REG) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 203401 OF 2024(S-REG) WRIT PETITION NO. 203403 OF 2024(S-REG) WRIT PETITION NO. 203404 OF 2024(S-REG) WRIT PETITION NO. 203407 OF 2024(S-REG) WRIT PETITION NO. 203927 OF 2024(S-REG) IN W.P.NO.203938/2024: BETWEEN: MR. HUSENA BASHA S/O AKBAR ALI, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, RESIDING AT JANATHA COLONY, KAVITAL, KOWTAL - 584120, RAICHUR. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ABDUL MUQHTADIR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS UNDER SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION VIKAS SOUDHA, DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDI Digitally signed by SACHIN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1347 WP No. 203938 of 2024 C/W WP No. 203401 of 2024 WP No. 203403 of 2024 AND 3 OTHERS BENGALURU – 560001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION 1-4, IT PARK, 4TH FLOOR RAJAJI NAGAR INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, BENGALURU – 560010 3. THE KARNATAKA STATE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY UDYOGA BHAVAN, BENGALURU – 560001 4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER RAICHUR, DIST.RAICHUR – 584101 5. THE TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, LINGASUGUR REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF OFFICER LINGASUGUR, DIST.RAICHUR – 584122 6. THE PATTAN PANCHAYAT, HATTI REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF OFFICER HATTI - 584115, TQ.LINGASUGUR, DIST.RAICHUR 7. MS. ASHWINI D/O UNKONWN AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/O SANNAHOSUR, POST MADAGIRI TQ. MANVI, DIST. RAICHUR - 584129 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MALLIKARJUN SAHUKAR, AGA FOR R1, R2 AND R4; SRI. KRUPA SAGAR PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R5; SRI. R. J. BHUSARE, ADVOCATE FOR R3; SRI. VENKATESH C. MALLABADI, AND SRI. SATISH D. GADKAR, ADVOCATES FOR R7; R-5 AND R6 ARE SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE AN APPROPRIATE WRIT DIRECTION/S OR ORDER/S A) ISSUE AN APPROPRIATE ORDER/DIRECTION/WRIT IN NATURE - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1347 WP No. 203938 of 2024 C/W WP No. 203401 of 2024 WP No. 203403 of 2024 AND 3 OTHERS OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER BEARING NO. _¸ÀASÉå:£À C E 227 E JA ¹ 2024 (O) DATED 17-12-2024 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 VIDE ANNEXURE-F. B) ISSUE AN APPROPRIATE ORDER/DIRECTION/WRIT IN NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING RESPONDENT NO.1 TO 6 TO REGULARIZE THE SERVICE OF THE PETITIONER FROM THE DATE OF JOINING AND EXTENT ALL CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS TO THE PETITIONER INCLUDING MONETARY BENEFITS. IN W.P. NO. 203401 OF 2024: BETWEEN: JAYSHREE D/O VASANTH RATHOD, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: ACCOUNTANT, TOWN MUNCIPAL COUNCIL, KEMBHAVI-585215, DIST. YADGIR. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHIVAPUTRA S.UDABALKAR, AND SRI. SANGOLI NAGANNA, ADVOCATES) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT, VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, 1-4, IT PARK, 4 FLOOR, RAJAJINAGAR INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, BANGALORE-10 3. THE KARNATAKA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSIONER, REP BY ITS SECRETARY UDYOG BHAVAN, BANGALORE-560001. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1347 WP No. 203938 of 2024 C/W WP No. 203401 of 2024 WP No. 203403 of 2024 AND 3 OTHERS 4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, YADGIR DIST. YADGIR-585201. 5. THE COMMISSIONER, CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, SHAHPUR, TQ. SHAHPUR DIST. YADGIRI. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MALLIKARJUN SAHUKAR, AGA FOR R1, R2 AND R4; SRI. CHAITANYAKUMAR C. M., ADVOCATE FOR R5; SRI. R. J. BHUSARE, ADVOCATE FOR R3; SRI. VENKATESH C. MALLABADI, AND SRI. SATISH D. GADKAR, ADVOCATES FOR R6) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITIES TO REGULARISE HER SERVICE WITH ALL CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS AS DEMANDED IN ANNEXURE-M DATED 21.11.2024. IN W.P. NO. 203403 OF 2024: BETWEEN: RUPA PRASANNA KULKARNI AGE: 35 YRS, OCC: ACCOUNTANT TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, WADI TQ. SHAHBAD - 585225 DIST. KALABURAGI …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHIVAPUTRA S.UDABALKAR, AND SRI. SANGOLI NAGANNA, ADVOCATES) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS SECRETARY, - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1347 WP No. 203938 of 2024 C/W WP No. 203401 of 2024 WP No. 203403 of 2024 AND 3 OTHERS DEPT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT, VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU – 560001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, 1-4, IT PARK, 4 FLOOR, RAJAJINAGAR INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, BANGALORE-10 3. THE KARNATAKA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSIONER, REP BY ITS SECRETARY UDYOG BHAVAN, BANGALORE -1. 4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KALABURAGI DIST.KALABURAGI 585102. 5. THE CHIEF OFFICER TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, WADI-585225 TQ.SHAHABAD DIST.KALABURAGI …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MALLIKARJUN SAHUKAR, AGA FOR R1, R2 AND R4; SMT. SHARADA PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R5; SRI. R. J. BHUSARE, ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITIES TO REGULARIZE HER SERVICE WITH ALL CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS AS DEMANDED IN ANNEXURES-P DATED 21.09.2023, ANNEXURES-S 21.11.2024 AND ANNEXURES-T 21.11.2024. IN W.P.NO. 203404 OF 2024: BETWEEN: MEGHA D/O MAHANTAPPA, AGE: 35 YRS OCC: ACCOUNTANT, - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1347 WP No. 203938 of 2024 C/W WP No. 203401 of 2024 WP No. 203403 of 2024 AND 3 OTHERS TOWN MUNCIPAL COUNCIL, AFZALPUR-585225 DIST. KALABURGI. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHIVAPUTRA S. UDABALKAR, AND SRI. SANGOLI NAGANNA, ADVOCATES) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT, VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, 1-4, IT PARK, 4 FLOOR, RAJAJINAGAR INDUSTRIAL ESTATE’ BANGALORE -10 3. THE KARNATAKA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSIONER, REP BY ITS SECRETARY UDYOG BHAVAN,, BANGALORE-560001. 4. THE DEPUTY COMMISIONER KALABURAGI DIST. KALABURAGI-585 102. 5. THE CHIEF OFFICER, TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, AFZALPUR TQ. AFZALPUR 585301 DIST. KALABURAGI …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MALLIKARJUN SAHUKAR, AGA FOR R1, R2 AND R4; SRI. B V. JALDE, ADVOCATE FOR R5; SRI. R. J. BHUSARE, ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITIES TO REGULARISE HER SERVICE WITH ALL CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS AS DEMENDED IN ANNEXURE-S DATED 21.09.2023, ANNEXURES-V 21.11.2024 AND ANNEXURES -W 21.11.2024. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1347 WP No. 203938 of 2024 C/W WP No. 203401 of 2024 WP No. 203403 of 2024 AND 3 OTHERS IN W. P. NO.203407/2024: BETWEEN: SHEKHAR S/O SHARNAPPA, AGE: 35 YRS OCC: ACCOUNTANT, TOWN MUNCIPAL COUNCIL, KAKKERA-585215 DIST. YADGIR …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHIVAPUTRA S. UDABALKAR, AND SRI. SANGOLI NAGANNA, ADVOCATES) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT, VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, 1-4, IT PARK, 4 FLOOR, RAJAJINAGAR, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, BANGALORE -10 3. THE KARNATAKA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSIONER, REP BY ITS SECRETARY UDYOG BHAVAN, BANGALORE-560001. 4. THE DEPUTY COMMISIONER, YADGIR DIST. YADGIR-585201 5. THE CHIEF OFFICER TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, KAKKERA-585215 TQ. SURUPUR DIST. YADGIR …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MALLIKARJUN SAHUKAR, AGA FOR R1, R2 AND R4; SRI. R. J. BHUSARE, ADVOCATE FOR R3; R-5 SERVED) - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1347 WP No. 203938 of 2024 C/W WP No. 203401 of 2024 WP No. 203403 of 2024 AND 3 OTHERS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITIES TO REGULARISE HIS SERVICE WITH ALL CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS AS DEMANDED IN ANNEXURES-O DATED 25-11-2024. IN W.P.NO. 203927 OF 2024: BETWEEN: RAJU S/O RUDRAPPA GALI, AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: ACCOUNTANT IN TMC DEVADURGA, R/O VILLAGE BALAGANUR, TQ.MASKI, DIST.RAICHUR – 584138. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SACHIN M. MAHAJAN, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION VIKAS SOUDHA, DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDI, BENGALURU – 560001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION 1-4, IT PARK, 4TH FLOOR, RAJAJI NAGAR INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, BENGALURU – 560010. 3. THE KARNATAKA STATE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, UDYOGA BHAVAN, BENGALURU – 560001. 4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, RAICHUR, DIST.RAICHUR – 584101. - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1347 WP No. 203938 of 2024 C/W WP No. 203401 of 2024 WP No. 203403 of 2024 AND 3 OTHERS 5. THE TOWN MINICIPAL COUNCIL, DEVADURGA, DIST.RAICHUR - 584111 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF OFFICER 6. SHIVARAJ B NAGREDDY AGE: 29 YEARS, R/O RAMNAGAR VILLAGE, UNDER KOPPAR GRAM PANCHAYAT TQ.DEVADURGA, DIST.RAICHUR - 584111 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MALLIKARJUN SAHUKAR, AGA FOR R1, R2 AND R4; SRI. R. J. BHUSARE, ADVOCATE FOR R3; SRI. VENKATESH C. MALLABADI, AND SRI. SATISH D. GADKAR, ADVOCATES FOR R6; R-5 IS SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI AND QUASH IMPUGNED ORDER/COMMUNICATION DATED 17-12- 2024, BEARING NO. SANKHE/NA A E/227EMC/2024(O) ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 VIDE ANNEXURE-D, II) ISSUE A WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS, THEREBY DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 5 REGULARIZE THE SERVICE OF THE PETITIONER. THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.NATARAJ - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1347 WP No. 203938 of 2024 C/W WP No. 203401 of 2024 WP No. 203403 of 2024 AND 3 OTHERS ORAL ORDER In WP No. 203938/2024, the petitioner has challenged communication dated 17.12.2024, posting respondent No.7 as an Accountant at Lingasugur Town Municipal Council. 2. The petitioner contends that the respondent No.4 had issued a notification inviting eligible applicants for the post of Accountant on contract basis. He further asserts that respondent No. 4, after conducting an interview selected the petitioner, who was the most meritorious candidate, in terms of an order dated 28.03.2017. The petitioner contends that his services were continued from year to year until respondent No.7 was appointed and posted in his place. Therefore, he has approached this Court challenging the order of posting the respondent No.7. He has also sought a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents Nos.1 to 6 to regularize his services and extend all consequential benefits. - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1347 WP No. 203938 of 2024 C/W WP No. 203401 of 2024 WP No. 203403 of 2024 AND 3 OTHERS 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No.4 had issued a notification, pursuant to which 40 applicants submitted their applications. However, Respondent No.4 had issued interview notices to 24 applicants and prepared a provisional list selecting 8 candidates and invited objections. He contends that the petitioner was appointed as accountant, based on merit. He further contends that the reservation roster was strictly followed and that the petitioner was permitted to work from the year 2017 until respondent No.7 was appointed. He contends that the petitioner could not have been replaced by respondent No.7, but, his services should have been continued by regularizing his appointment. 4. In WP No. 203401/2024, the petitioner has sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus to regularize her services and extend all consequential benefits as demanded in her representation dated 21.11.2024. 5. The petitioner contends that respondent No.4 had published a notification dated 09.09.2016 under the - 12 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1347 WP No. 203938 of 2024 C/W WP No. 203401 of 2024 WP No. 203403 of 2024 AND 3 OTHERS KMRP scheme, inviting applications from suitable candidates for appointment as an Accountant at Kembhavi on contract basis. She contends that she was selected for the post in terms of an order dated 21.11.2016 and had attended certain training programs required for the post. Her employment continued from the year 2016 until 2019. However, instead of regularizing her services, respondent No.1 issued a notification dated 31.07.2020, inviting applications from eligible candidates to fill up the post of Accountant in urban local bodies. The petitioner contends that, having served the respondents from the year 2016, she was entitled for regularization of her service, as all requirements for a regular recruitment were complied with. Since the same was not done, she submitted a representation dated 21.11.2024. The petitioner contends that her representation was not considered and hence, she has approached this Court seeking appropriate directions. 6. In WP No. 203403/2024, the petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the - 13 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1347 WP No. 203938 of 2024 C/W WP No. 203401 of 2024 WP No. 203403 of 2024 AND 3 OTHERS respondents to regularize her services with all consequential benefits, as demanded in her representations dated 21.09.2023, 21.11.2024 and 21.11.2024 respectively. 7. The petitioner contends that respondent No.4 had issued a notification dated 02.01.2016 under the KMRP scheme, inviting applications from eligible candidates for the post of Accountant at Aland, Wadi on contract basis. She contends that in response to the notification, 10 candidates had applied and after a selection process, she was appointed on contract basis vide an appointment order dated 19.12.2016. The petitioner contends that she had attended several training programs related to her appointment and continued in service from the year 2016. However, she contends that a notification was issued on 31.07.2020, inviting applications to fill the post of Accountant in urban local bodies. The petitioner contends that the Chief Officer of respondent No.5 had addressed a letter bearing - 14 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1347 WP No. 203938 of 2024 C/W WP No. 203401 of 2024 WP No. 203403 of 2024 AND 3 OTHERS No.PSW/Sibbandi/2023-24 to the Project Director, District Urban Development Cell, Kalaburagi regarding the appointment of the petitioner and her satisfactory service from the date of her appointment till date. The petitioner contends that since she had rendered satisfactory service from her appointment until now, she requested the respondents to regularize her service. However, her request was not considered. Consequently, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking for directions to consider her representation. 8. In WP No. 203404/2024, the petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to regularize her services with all consequential benefits, as demanded in her representations dated 21.09.2023, 21.11.2024 and 21.11.2024 respectively. 9. The petitioner contends that respondent No.4 had published a notification dated 02.01.2016 under the KMRP scheme, inviting applications for the post of - 15 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1347 WP No. 203938 of 2024 C/W WP No. 203401 of 2024 WP No. 203403 of 2024 AND 3 OTHERS Accountant at Aland, Wadi on contract basis. She contends that 10 candidates applied and after evaluating their merit, she was appointed vide an appointment letter dated 10.08.2016. She contends that she underwent training on various work-related programs and her employment was confirmed from the year 2016 until 2020. However, respondent No.1 issued a notification dated 31.07.2020, inviting applications for Accountant posts in urban local bodies. She also contends that she was given all the benefits that are normally given to regular employees and was treated on par with other employees. This she contends was a promise made by the State that her services would be continued perpetually and that her services would be regularized. The petitioner submits that since she had worked continuously to the satisfaction of the official respondents, she was entitled for regularization. Despite submitting several representations, her request was not considered. Therefore, she is before this Court seeking direction to the respondents. - 16 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1347 WP No. 203938 of 2024 C/W WP No. 203401 of 2024 WP No. 203403 of 2024 AND 3 OTHERS 10. In WP No. 203407/2024, the petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to regularize his services with all consequential benefits, as demanded in his representation dated 25.11.2024. 11. The petitioner states that respondent No.4 issued a notification dated 09.09.2016 under the KMRP scheme, inviting applications from eligible candidates for the post of Accountant at Aland, Wadi on contract basis. He contends that 23 candidates applied and after evaluating their merit, he was selected and appointed vide an appointment letter dated 14.09.2017. He contends that he attended training programs related to his work and worked to the satisfaction of the superiors from the year 2017 till the year 2020, when respondent No.1 issued a notification dated 31.07.2020 inviting applications from eligible candidates for the post of Accountant in urban local bodies. He contends that he was entitled for regularization of his service, as the criteria for selecting an - 17 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1347 WP No. 203938 of 2024 C/W WP No. 203401 of 2024 WP No. 203403 of 2024 AND 3 OTHERS regular employee were met. He submits that he had submitted representation requesting the respondents to regularize his services, but the same was not considered. Therefore, he is before this Court seeking direction to the respondents. 12. In WP No. 203927/2024, the petitioner has challenged an order/communication dated 17.12.2024 issued by respondent No.1, posting the respondent No.6 as an Accountant at respondent No.5. He has also sought a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to regularize his services. 13. The petitioner contends that respondent No.4 had published a notification on 28.10.2016, inviting applications from eligible candidates for Accountant posts in various municipalities of Raichur district. He contends that 40 applications were received, in response to the notification and respondent No.4 after assessing merit, appointed him, though on contract basis in terms of the order dated 18.11.2017. The petitioner contends that he - 18 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1347 WP No. 203938 of 2024 C/W WP No. 203401 of 2024 WP No. 203403 of 2024 AND 3 OTHERS was working with the respondent No.5 from then on till date. He contends that since he was appointed against a sanctioned post and that all the requirement of regular recruitment was complied and all applicable roster was applied, respondents had assured that services of the petitioner would be regularized. However, respondent No.1 issued a communication on 17.12.2024, posting respondent No.6 in his place. Hence, he has approached this Court challenging the posting of respondent No.6 as an Accountant at respondent No.5. 14. Learned counsel for the petitioners in all these writ petitions contended that the post of Accountant in urban local bodies were all sanctioned posts and respondent No.4 had published notifications inviting applications from eligible candidates. They all contend that recruitment process for a regular recruitment was complied with, as much as interviews were conducted and the most meritorious candidates were selected, after the reservation roster was applied. They all contend that - 19 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1347 WP No. 203938 of 2024 C/W WP No. 203401 of 2024 WP No. 203403 of 2024 AND 3 OTHERS though they were initially appointed on contract basis, they worked from the date of their appointment, till respondent No.1 initiated selection process through Karnataka State Public Service Commission. 15. The petitioners contend in one voice that given the nature of work, the manner of their appointment and the way, in which they have performed their duty over the years and taking into account the fact that the petitioners may lose their chance to participate in a regular recruitment due to their advanced age, their services should be regularized. In support of their contention, they relied upon the judgment of a coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P. No.200865/2022 and the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Jaggo vs. Union of India & Others1. 16. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate submitted that the appointment of the petitioners was based on the terms specified in their 1 2024 INSC 1034 - 20 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1347 WP No. 203938 of 2024 C/W WP No. 203401 of 2024 WP No. 203403 of 2024 AND 3 OTHERS appointment letters. He contended that respondent No.4 had maintained transparency in contractual appointment also, by publishing notifications inviting applications from eligible candidates and selecting the most meritorious candidates. However, he contends that such selection was purely on contractual basis, in view of the Government Order dated 14.02.2007, which mandated the implementation of a Double Entry Accrual-Based Accounting System. He further contends that since respondent No.1 could not immediately undertake the recruitment process, respondent No.4 felt it appropriate to appoint eligible candidates on contractual basis. He contends that respondent No.1 is not debarred or prohibited from engaging eligible candidates on contractual basis. He further submits that the appointment orders issued to the petitioners explicitly stated that their appointments were contractual in nature and initially for a period of one year or until the date of commencement of a regular recruitment process, whichever was earlier. He - 21 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1347 WP No. 203938 of 2024 C/W WP No. 203401 of 2024 WP No. 203403 of 2024 AND 3 OTHERS therefore contends that the petitioners cannot compel the respondents to regularize their services. 17. Per contra, learned counsel for the selected candidates in W.P.No.203401/2024, W.P No.203927/2024, and W.P.No.203938/2024 reiterated the submissions of the learned Additional Government Advocate and contended that the petitioners have no locus standi to challenge the regular appointment of the appointees or their orders of posting. He also contends that none of the petitioners have challenged the notifications issued by the State Government inviting applications from eligible candidates for the post of Accountant in Urban Local Bodies. He contended that the only challenge raised in these petitions is against mere letters posting the appointees in place of the petitioners. Even otherwise, they contended that the petitioners do not have any right to seek regularization of their services, as they have rendered service for only six to seven years, until the appointees were appointed. He further contends that the - 22 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1347 WP No. 203938 of 2024 C/W WP No. 203401 of 2024 WP No. 203403 of 2024 AND 3 OTHERS notification issued by respondent No.1 was in the year 2020 and therefore, the appointment of the petitioner came to an end, soon after a fresh notification was issued. He also contends that none of the petitioners filed applications against the said notification and therefore, they cannot obstruct the appointments of the private respondents. 18. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Additional Government Advocate for the official respondents and the learned counsel for the private respondents. 19. Under the "Double Entry Accrual-Based Accounting System" introduced by R-1, the concerned Deputy Commissioners were permitted to recruit B.Com graduates on contractual basis. Accordingly, based on exigencies of the scheme, the Deputy Commissioners published notifications inviting applications from eligible candidates for appointment on contractual basis. The petitioners who were selected were appointed on contract - 23 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1347 WP No. 203938 of 2024 C/W WP No. 203401 of 2024 WP No. 203403 of 2024 AND 3 OTHERS basis for one year or till a regular recruitment was done, whichever was earlier. The appointment orders of the petitioners in all these writ petitions indicate that respondent No.4 had appointed them on contract basis, for the implementation of the accounting system. The petitioners were therefore fully aware that their possible employment would be on a contractual basis. The appointment orders issued in favour of the petitioners explicitly stated that their appointments were contractual in nature and was to be in force for a period of one year or till a regular recruitment process is undertaken, whichever is earlier. No doubt, the petitioners were allowed to continue working from the date of their appointment, i.e. 2016-17 until a regular recruitment was undertaken by respondent No.1 through a notification dated 31.07.2020. The respondent No.1 has now completed the recruitment process and the selected candidates have been appointed. None of the petitioners applied against the notification but have allowed it to pass. None of them have challenged the - 24 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1347 WP No. 203938 of 2024 C/W WP No. 203401 of 2024 WP No. 203403 of 2024 AND 3 OTHERS notification invited by the R-1 for a regular recruitment and none of them have challenged the appointment of the private respondent. Therefore, the petitioners cannot claim that they are entitled to be regularized in service, as their appointment itself was contractual in nature. Furthermore, in light of the notification issued by the State Government, which was in compliance with Article 16 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners cannot claim that they are entitled to continue in service. 20. The judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.No.200865/2022 is clearly distinguishable on facts, as in that case, many employees, though on contractual basis were allowed to continue until absorption rules were framed by the State Government, which ultimately decided to absorb all the employees working under a scheme. Their employment continued for several years and thereafter, an attempt was made to dislodge them and in that circumstance, this court directed regularization. However, in the instant case, the - 25 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1347 WP No. 203938 of 2024 C/W WP No. 203401 of 2024 WP No. 203403 of 2024 AND 3 OTHERS petitioners were appointed purely on a contractual basis and respondent No.1 had taken steps to initiate a regular recruitment. Similarly, in the case of Jaggo v. Union of India(Supra), relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioners, that was a case where Group D employees were working for more than 20 years in various establishments and were performing essential housekeeping and support functions. The Hon’ble Apex Court, in that situation held that continuous and substantive engagement against substantive posts would result in right to compel the official respondents to regularize their service. 21. In the present case, none of the petitioners have completed a minimum tenure of 10 years on contractual basis, but were aware that their appointment would always remain contractual and shall terminate, soon after commencement of a regular recruitment process. 22. In that view of the matter, the petitioners are not entitled to any of the reliefs sought for in these writ - 26 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1347 WP No. 203938 of 2024 C/W WP No. 203401 of 2024 WP No. 203403 of 2024 AND 3 OTHERS petitions. Even otherwise, none of the petitioners have challenged the recruitment notification issued by the respondent No.1 inviting applications from eligible candidates for regular appointment to the post of Accountant and what they have challenged are mere orders of posting issued by respondent No.1, posting private respondents in place of the petitioners. Hence, the petitioners are not entitled to any relief. Consequently, all these writ petitions are dismissed. 23. In the event of respondents issuing any recruitment notifications, the question whether the petitioners are entitled for relaxation of age for their past service is kept open to be considered. 24. Pending I.A.No.1/2025 in WP No.203938/2024, I.A.No.2/2025 in WP No.203401/2024 and I.A.No.1/2025 in WP No.203927/2024, do not survive for consideration. Sd/- (R.NATARAJ) JUDGE NJ,List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20,CT:SI