IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP. No. 6659 of 2010 Date of Decision: 9.4.2010. Sukhbir Singh & others --Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and another --Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI. Present:- Mr. J.S. Bedi, Advocate for the petitioners. *** PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL) The petitioners were engaged as Driver on contract basis pursuant to advertisement (Annexure P-1). The engagement of the petitioners was for a period of 89 days as per D.C rates. The petitioners were required to execute a service agreement which the petitioners have already executed. It is contended on behalf of the petitioners that even though, their contract was for a period of 89 days but they are continuing. It is further contended on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioners were selected after seeking names from the Employment Exchange and through the advertisement. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are now being asked to execute a fresh service agreement. It is further contended that the posts are vacant and the respondents want to replace the petitioners. It is admitted case of the petitioners that they were engaged on contract basis. The contract period is already over. The petitioners have only been asked to execute a fresh agreement on expiry of the initial contract agreement. No right vests in the petitioner to continue particularly when the petitioners were engaged on contract basis. Without executing a CWP. No. 6659 of 2010 -2- fresh agreement petitioners cannot continue in service after the expiry of the initial contract period, though, petitioners cannot be replaced by a similar temporary arrangement. If, the petitioners are willing to continue in service, they will have to execute the fresh service agreement. In view of the above, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue and not to replace them by a similar temporary arrangement unless they suffer from any disqualification or if, their services are no more required. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 9.4.2010. lucky