CW 13090/09 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.13090/09 Harbhan Singh & Ors. Versus State & Ors. DATE OF ORDER : 22/10/2009 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI Mr. Tanveer Ahmed, for petitioners *** Instant petition has been filed jointly by three petitioners with the grievance that earlier they had worked in Panchayat Samiti Manohar Thana, District Jhalawar on contract basis as Assistant Secretary from 1st March, 2008 to 31st March, 2008 as evident from document [Ann.1]. However, earlier an advertisement was issued for making appointments by selection on contract basis dt.15th February, 2008, but that process could not be completed. Respondents have now issued advertisement on 23rd June, 2009 [Ann.3] inviting applications for appointment on contract basis in National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme on the post of Rozgar Sahayak. Counsel submits that since they had earlier worked on contract basis, they have preferential claim for seeking appointment and manner of replacement of contractual employee through CW 13090/09 [2] another set of contractual employee, is violative of Art.14 of the Constitution. In opinion of this court, submission is devoid of merit for the reason that earlier they had worked purely on contract basis which does not confer any right in their favour and as per document [Ann.1] placed on record, it only depicts that they had worked from 1st March, 2008 to 31st March, 2008 and there is no such averment in the writ petition as to how long petitioners worked on contractual basis and as per material on record, they are not in service for last 16 months by now. Respondents have initiated process of making appointment under the Scheme through open advertisement dt.23rd June, 2009 which also gives opportunity to the petitioners as well and if they are eligible can certainly apply for their consideration. But, submission of replacement of employee from set of another contractual employee, has no application in the facts of instant case. Consequently, this petition is devoid of merit and accordingly, dismissed. [AJAY RASTOGI], J. FRBOHRA13090CW09 22-10.doc