W.P.(C) Nos.12799 of 2020 and connected cases

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS** **TUESDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF AUGUST 2020 / 13TH SRAVANA, 1942** ## **WP(C).No.12799 OF 2020(Y)** ## **PETITIONER/S:** |**1**|**VIPIN K.P**| |---|---| ||**AGED 34 YEARS**| ||**S/O. VIJAYAN K.P., KARAKKATPARAMBIL,**| ||**MARIKUNNU P.O. CALICUT 673 012.**| |**2**|**SHIJIN.E.,**| ||**AGED 33 YEARS**| ||**S/O. BHASKARAN. E, ENNAZHIYIL HOUSE, K.G.**| ||**PAPI (SOUTH ANNARA), TIRUR 676 101.**| |**3**|**MAHEENDRAN.K.,**| ||**AGED 41 YEARS**| ||**S/O. SREEDHARAN K.K., KURUPPANKANDI,**| ||**CHEMMAND, TIRURANGADI 676 306.**| ||**BY ADV. SRI.C.E.UNNIKRISHNAN**| |**RESPONDENT/S**<br>**:**|| |**1**|**LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA**| ||**CENTRAL OFFICE, YOGAKSHEME JEEVAN BHEEMA**| ||**MARG, MUMBAI 400021 REPRESENTED BY ITS**| ||**CHAIRMAN.**| |**2**|**THE ZONAL MANAGER,**| ||**LIC OF INDIA, ZONAL OFFICE, CHENNAI 600001.**| |**3**|**THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL MANAGER,**| ||**LIC OF INDIA, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, KOZHIKODE**| ||**673 001.**| W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases **==> picture [18 x 6] intentionally omitted <==** - **4 THE BRANCH MANAGER, LIC OF INDIA, TIRUR BRANCH, TIRUR 676 101.** - **5 THE BRANCH MANAGER, LIC OF INDIA, SATELLIT SAMPARK OFFICE, TIROORANGADI 676 306.** **R1-5 BY SHRI.S.EASWARAN, SC, LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28-07-2020, ALONG WITH WP(C).13725/2020(M), WP(C).13757/2020(T),WP(C).14004/2020(A), WP(C).14067/2020 (G), WP(C).14401/2020(A), THE COURT ON 04-08-2020 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..3.. ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS** **TUESDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF AUGUST 2020 / 13TH SRAVANA, 1942** **WP(C).No.13725 OF 2020(M)** ## **PETITIONER/S:** |**1**|**SUDHAKARAN C.**| |---|---| ||**AGED 47 YEARS**| ||**S/O.C.GOPALAN, CHOPPALAM HOUSE, KOTTOOR-**| ||**671541.**| |**2**|**DHANESH.P.D.**| ||**AGED 30 YEARS**| ||**S/O.DAMODARAN.K., M D M HOUSE, POYNACHI**| ||**MUKKIL, THEKKIL-671541.**| |**3**|**PRAKASH.M.**| ||**AGED 30 YEARS**| ||**S/O.SHIVAPPAMOOLYA, MADANGALLU HOUSE,**| ||**MIYAPADAVUM MANJESWAR-671323.**| |**4**|**SATHEESH.M.**| ||**AGED 30 YEARS**| ||**S/O.VASANTHAN, MULLERIA HOUSE, KARADUKKA-**| ||**671543.**| |**5**|**ASHOK.B.N.**| ||**AGED 28 YEARS**| ||**S/O.NAMADEVA SHETTY, MULLERIA HOUSE,**| ||**KARADUKKA-671551.**| W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..4.. - **6 SHAILESH.K. AGED 36 YEARS S/O.K.K.MADHAVAN, 'SINDHOORA', KANTAHITHLU, MANJESWAR-671543.** - **7 JITHESH.P. AGED 35 YEARS S/O.BALAKRISHNAN.P., POROLI HOUSE, AMBALATHUKARA, ACHIKANAM-671531.** - **8 VIVEK.P.V. AGED 29 YEARS S/O.BALAKRISHNAN.P.V., VAISHAK NIVAS, AMBALATHARA, ACHKANAM, KASARAGOD-671531.** - **9 AMRITHKUMAR.K.V. AGED 29 YEARS S/O.V.M.NARAYANAN, MUKUNDIL HOUSE, AMBALATHARA, ACHIKKANAM-671531.** - **10 BINDU.K. AGED 44 YEARS D/O.K.V.KUNHIKANNAN, APARTMENT 423, VELLIKOTH, AJANOOR-671531.** - **11 PRABHAKARAN.K.V. AGED 56 YEARS S/O.KUNJIPENNU.P.O., KIZHAKKEVALAPPIL, CHEEMENI-671351.** - **12 SEEMA PRABHU.B.M. AGED 41 YEARS W/O.RAJESH PAI.N., PRABHA QUARTERS, THERVAYAL, NILESWAR-671314.** - **13 RAJITH.P. AGED 38 YEARS S/O.P.NARAYANAN, PORAYIK HOUSE, ACHAMTHURUTHI671351.** W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..5.. **14 RESHMA.K. AGED 38 YEARS W/O.K.V.PAVITHRAN, CHERIYAKKARA-671313. 15 SUMADEVI.D.N. AGED 49 YEARS W/O.SURESH.V., VELLOOKARANV EEDU, THADIYANKOVVAL, UDINOOR-671310. 16 PRANAV.P.K. AGED 28 YEARS S/O.INDIRA.P.K., 'PRANAVAM', UDINOOR-671310. 17 PRAMEELA.K.V. AGED 42 YEARS W/O.SHASHINDRAN, KUTHIRUMMAL, NADAKKAVUUDINOOR-671310. BY ADVS. SRI.C.E.UNNIKRISHNAN SRI.M.P.PRABHAKARAN (PALAKKAD)** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** - **1 LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA, CENTRAL OFFICE, YOGAKSHEMA, JEEVAN BHEEMA MARG, MUMBAI-400021, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN.** - **2 THE ZONAL MANAGER, LIC OF INDIA, ZONAL OFFICE, CHENNAI-600001.** - **3 THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL MANAGER, LIC OF INDIA, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, KOZHIKODE673001.** - **4 THE BRANCH MANAGER, LIC OF INDIA, KASARAGOD BRANCH, KASARAGOD671121.** W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..6.. - **5 THE BRANCH MANAGER, LIC OF INDIA, SATELLITE SAMPARK OFFICE, MANJESWARAM-671323.** - **6 THE BRANCH MANAGER, LIC OF INDIA, SATELLITE SAMPARK OFFICE, THRIKKAIPOOR-671323.** - **7 THE BRANCH MANAGER, LICE OF INDIA, KANHANGAD BRANCH, KASARAGOD671315.** - **8 THE BRANCH MANAGER, LIC OF INDIA, NILESWAR BRANCH, NILESWAR671314.** **R1-8 BY SHRI.S.EASWARAN, SC, LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28-07-2020, ALONG WITH WP(C).12799/2020(Y), WP(C).13757/2020(T),WP(C).14004/2020(A), WP(C).14067/2020 (G), WP(C).14401/2020(A), THE COURT ON 04-08-2020 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..7.. ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS** **TUESDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF AUGUST 2020 / 13TH SRAVANA, 1942** **WP(C).No.13757 OF 2020(T)** ## **PETITIONER/S:** |**1**|**SUJITH K.**| |---|---| ||**AGED 31 YEARS**| ||**S/O.SUBRAHMANYAN, KOMMADATH HOUSE, VATTAKINAR,**| ||**KOZHIKODE - 673018.**| |**2**|**SHARATH P.**| ||**AGED 29 YEARS**| ||**S/O.PUROSHOTHAMA P., APPU NIVAS, PUTHIYANGADI,**| ||**KOZHIKODE - 673 021.**| |**3**|**NIRMALAKUMARI C.**| ||**AGED 44 YEARS**| ||**W/O.PRAMKUMAR K., SURABHI 17/2304/2,**| ||**KULATHOOPADIKKAL HOUSE, NELLICODE, KOZHIKODE -**| ||**673 017.**| |**4**|**SANTHA C.M.**| ||**AGED 56 YEARS**| ||**W/O.NARAYANAN, AZHAKATH, ERAVATOOR, KOZHIKODE**| ||**- 673 525.**| |**5**|**SUNEESH M.**| ||**AGED 42 YEARS**| ||**S/O.SANKARAN, MUNDOTTI, PERAMBRA, ERAVATTOOR,**| ||**KOZHIKODE - 673 525.**| W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..8.. - **6 GOPALAKRISHNAN AGED 52 YEARS S/O.KUTTYASANKARAN NAIR, ONIYIL, ASHARIMUKKU, MENNANIAM, KOZHIKODE - 673525.** - **7 BINDU K. AGED 7 YEARS W/O.SUGATHAN V., GITANJALI, KUTTYADI - 673 508.** - **8 PAVITHRAN P.P. AGED 54 YEARS S/O.DAMODARAN, SKRUTHAM, NUT STREET, VADAKARA - 673 104.** - **9 REESHMA K. AGED 36 YEARS W/O.PRASAD P.M., PUTHIYAPMALAPARAMBATH, MEPPAYIL - 673 104.** |**10**|**REENA V.P.**| |---|---| ||**AGED 43 YEARS**| ||**W/O.RAVEENDRAN, PARPPIDAM, KAKKATTIL, VADAYAM**| ||**- 673 507.**| |**11**|**SINDHU E.K.**| ||**AGED 42 YEARS**| ||**W/O.MOHANAN M.P., SAMMOHANAM, ARAKKILADU - 673**| ||**104.**| |**12**|**VIJISH M.V.**| ||**AGED 38 YEARS**| ||**S/O.SATHYABHAMA, MAMBATTAKKARA, RAROTH,**| ||**THAMARASSERY - 673 573.**| |**13**|**ANATHU C.K.**| ||**AGED 24 YEARS**| ||**S/O.SAHADEVAN, 12/794A, CHEKKANNIKARA,**| ||**PARAPPANPOYIL - 673 573.**| W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..9.. - **14 PRASEETA O. AGED 38 YEARS W/O.SUNIL KUMAR, MALAYIL KUNNUMMEL HOUSE, PUTHUKKOD, VAZHAYOOR - 673 633.** - **15 RANJULALA AGED 36 YEARS S/O.RAMAKRISHNAN, 9/176, ATHOLI HOUSE, KUZHIMANA, THAVANOOR - 673 641.** - **16 DINESH K. AGED 50 YEARS S/O.CHANDRASEKHARAN, AREEPURATHUMEETHAL, KOMMERI - 673007.** - **17 SIDHA C. AGED 38 YEARS W/O.NARENDRAN P.M., PUZHAMPURATHU MEETHAL, GA COLLEGE, PALAZHY - 673 014.** - **18 GEETHA V. AGED 54 YEARS W/O.VIJAYAN, KARAEKKAD PARAMBU, AR CAMP ROAD, MARIKKUNNU, KOZHIKODE -673 012.** **BY ADVS.** **SRI.C.E.UNNIKRISHNAN SRI.M.P.PRABHAKARAN (PALAKKAD)** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** - **1 LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA CENTRAL OFFICE, YOGAKSHEMA, JEEVAN BHEEMA MARG, MUMBAI - 400 021 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN.** - **2 THE ZONAL MANAGER LIC OF INDIA, ZONAL OFFICE, CHENNAI - 600001.** W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..10.. - **3 THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL MANAGER LIC OF INDIA, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, KOZHIKODE - 673001.** - **4 THE BRANCH MANAGER LIC OF INDIA, BRANCH-1, KOZHIKODE - 673 001.** - **5 THE BRANCH MANAGER LIC OF INDIA, SATELLITE SAMPARK OFFICE, MEDICAL COLLEGE -673 008.** - **6 THE BRANCH MANAGER LIC OF INDIA, PERAMBRA - 673 525.** - **7 THE BRANCH MANAGER LIC OF INDIA, VADAKARA BRANCH - 673 104.** - **8 THE BRANCH MANAGER LIC OF INDIA, NADAPURAM SASTELLITE SAMPARK OFFICE - 673 504.** - **9 THE BRANCH MANAGER LIC OF INDIA, CLIA SATELLITE SAMPARK OFFICE, EDODI - 673 101.** - **10 THE BRANCH MANAGER LIC OF INDIA, THAMARASSERY - 673 573.** - **11 THE BRANCH MANAGER LIC OF INDIA, RAMANATUKARA - 673 633.** - **12 THE BRANCH MANAGER LIC OF INDIA, BRANCH-III, KOZHIKODE - 673 101.** **R1-12 BY SHRI.S.EASWARAN, SC, LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28-07-2020, ALONG WITH WP(C).12799/2020(Y), WP(C).13725/2020(M),WP(C).14004/2020(A), WP(C).14067/2020 (G), WP(C).14401/2020(A), THE COURT ON 04-08-2020 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..11.. ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS** **TUESDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF AUGUST 2020 / 13TH SRAVANA, 1942** **WP(C).No.14004 OF 2020(A)** ## **PETITIONER/S:** |**1**|**PRAMEELA T.,**| |---|---| ||**AGED 53 YEARS**| ||**W/O. AJITHKUMAR.V., 'MITHILA' ,AMBALAPADY,**| ||**KARUVAMBRAM ,MANJERI-676 121**| |**2**|**SREEDEVI.P.V.,**| ||**AGED 46 YEARS**| ||**W/O. MADHU.M., NEEHARAM HOUSE, IRUMBUZHI,**| ||**MALAPPURAM -676 509**| |**3**|**MAYAMOL.V.,**| ||**AGED 41 YEARS**| ||**W/O. DEVADAS.C., CHEMBRA HOUSE, VARAKKULAM,**| ||**KARULAYI-679 330**| |**4**|**JINEESH.M.,**| ||**AGED 31 YEARS**| ||**MEDAPARAMBIL HOUSE, MADAMMAL, BEERAN CHIRA,**| ||**KODAKKAL, THIRUNAVAYA-676 108**| |**5**|**VIPINDAS.P.,**| ||**AGED 38 YEARS**| ||**S/O. VELAYUDHAN, PANDARATHIL, THIRKKALANGODE-**| ||**676 123**| |**6**|**SUBEESH.N.,**| ||**AGED 32 YEARS**| ||**THATTARUTHODI HOUSE, KOTTAKKAL-676 503**| W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..12.. - **7 VINUKUMAR.P., AGED 31 YEARS S/O. LATE RAMAN,639, PAZHAMBALAKODE-NILAMBUR CHETTIANGADI-679 329** - **8 VENUGOPALAN.K., AGED 25 YEARS S/O. ACHUTTAN NAIR.K., KARIMPANAKKAL HOUSE, KUNNUPURAM,PERUTALMANNA-679 322** **BY ADVS. SRI.C.E.UNNIKRISHNAN SRI.M.P.PRABHAKARAN (PALAKKAD)** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** - **1 LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA, CENTRAL OFFICE, YOGAKSHEMA, JEEVAN BHEEMA MARG, MUMBAI-400021, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN** - **2 THE ZONAL MANAGER, LIC OF INDIA, DIVISIONAL OFFICE,CHENNAI-600001** - **3 THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL MANAGER, LIC OF INDIA, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, KOZHIKODE-673 001** - **4 THE BRANCH MANAGER, LIC OF INDIA, MANJERI-676 123** - **5 THE BRANCH MANAGER, LIC OF INDIA, NILAMBUR-676 542** - **6 THE BRANCH MANAGER, LIC OF INDIA, TIRUR-676 101** - **7 THE BRANCH MANAGER, LIC OF INDIA,MALAPPURAM-676 505** W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..13.. - **8 THE BRANCH MANAGER, LIC OF INDIA, SATTELITE SAMPARK OFFICE, KOTTAKKAL-676 501** **9 THE BRANCH MANAGER, LIC OF INDIA, PERINTALMANNA-676 322** **R1-9 BY SHRI.S.EASWARAN, SC, LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28-07-2020, ALONG WITH WP(C).12799/2020(Y), WP(C).13725/2020(M),WP(C).13757/2020(T), WP(C).14067/2020 (G), WP(C).14401/2020(A), THE COURT ON 04-08-2020 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..14.. ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS** **TUESDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF AUGUST 2020 / 13TH SRAVANA, 1942** **WP(C).No.14067 OF 2020(G)** ## **PETITIONER/S:** |**1**|**SHIBIN M**| |---|---| ||**AGED 32 YEARS**| ||**S/O. MANOJA M, METTAMMAL HOUSE, KOKKANISSERI**| ||**PAYYANNUR - 670307.**| |**2**|**SREEJA P E**| ||**AGED 38 YEARS**| ||**W/O. GANESHAN P, PULUKKOOTTIL HOUSE,**| ||**KANDANGALI, PAYYANNUR-670307.**| |**3**|**BELJITH K**| ||**AGED 40 YEARS**| ||**S/O.M.V. DAMODARAN, MUNDAVALAPPIL HOUSE,**| ||**KANDOTH-PAYYANNUR-670307.**| |**4**|**SUPRABHA RAGHAVAN K**| ||**AGED 49 YEARS**| ||**D/O. RAGHAVAN T.V, RASMI, NEAR PUTHIYAKAVU**| ||**ROAD BUSSTOP, VELLOOR-670307.**| |**5**|**JAYEASH P**| ||**AGED 36 YEARS**| ||**S/O. P.V. VIJAYAN, PADASSERY HOUSE, OLAT,**| ||**KODAKKAD-KAZARAGOD-671310.**| W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..15.. - **6 SATHEESAN K AGED 41 YEARS S/O. A. THANKAPPAN, ATTAKUZHIKKAL, PAROTHUMNEER, PRAPOYIL, CHERUPUZHA,KANNUR.** **BY ADVS. SRI.C.E.UNNIKRISHNAN SRI.M.P.PRABHAKARAN (PALAKKAD)** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** - **1 LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA CENTRAL OFFICE, YOGAKSHEMA, JEEVAN BHEEMA MARG, MUMBAI-400021, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN,** - **2 THE ZONAL MANAGER, LIC OF INDIA, ZONAL OFFICE, CHENNAI-600001,** - **3 THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL MANAGER, LIC OF INDIA, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, KOZHIKODE673001.** - **4 THE BRANCH MANAGER, LIC OF INDIA, PAYYANNUR BRANCH, PAYYANNUR670307.** - **5 THE BRANCH MANAGER SATELLITE SAMPARK OFFICE, CHERUPUZHA-670307. R1-5 BY ADV. SRI.S.EASWARAN** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28-07-2020, ALONG WITH WP(C).12799/2020(Y), WP(C).13725/2020(M),WP(C).13757/2020(T), WP(C).14004/2020 (A), WP(C).14401/2020(A), THE COURT ON 04-08-2020 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..16.. ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS** **TUESDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF AUGUST 2020 / 13TH SRAVANA, 1942** **WP(C).No.14401 OF 2020(A)** ## **PETITIONER/S:** |**1**|**JYOTHISH KARAT**| |---|---| ||**AGED 48 YEARS**| ||**S/O. BALAKRISHNAN.K. KARAT, PURAKKATTIRI,**| ||**THALIKULATHUR, KOZHIKODE 673 317.**| |**2**|**SIVAPRASAD.K.,**| ||**AGED 52 YEARS**| ||**S/O. BHARGAVI AMMA, VADISSERY MAVOOR,**| ||**KOZHIKODE 673 661.**| |**3**|**SREELATHAT.K.,**| ||**AGED 54 YEARS**| ||**D/O. LATE REGHAVAN.K. KRISHNAPRIYA, ATHIKKAL,**| ||**NALLALAM, KOZHIKODE 673 027.**| ||**BY ADV. SRI.C.E.UNNIKRISHNAN**| ## **RESPONDENT/S:** |**1**|**LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA**| |---|---| ||**CENTRAL OFFICE, YOGAKSHEMA JEEVA BHEEMA MARG,**| ||**MUMBAI 400021 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN.**| |**2**|**THE ZONAL MANAGER,**| ||**LIC OF INDIA, ZONAL OFFICE, CHENNAI 600001.**| W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases **==> picture [21 x 8] intentionally omitted <==** **3 THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL MANAGER, LIC OF INDIA DIVISIONAL OFFICE, KOZHIKODE 673 001.** **R1-3 BY ADV. SRI.S.EASWARAN** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28-07-2020, ALONG WITH WP(C).12799/2020(Y), WP(C).13725/2020(M), WP(C).13757/2020(T), WP(C).14004/2020(A), WP(C).14067/2020(G), THE COURT ON 04-08-2020 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..18.. ## **C.S.DIAS, J.** **======================** W.P.(C)Nos.12799, 13725, 13757, 14004, 14067 & 14401 of 2020 ========================== **Dated this the 4[th] day of August, 2020.** ## **COMMON JUDGMENT** These batch of writ petitions are filed to quash Ext.P5 notification and to declare that the petitioners are entitled to continue in their present occupation until they are replaced by permanent employees, through a valid recruitment process. 2. As the pleadings, points and reliefs sought in these six writ petitions are substantially similar in nature, common questions of law are involved, and the respondents are the same, the writ petitions were jointly heard, and they are being disposed of by this common judgment. For the sake of convenience, W.P (C) No.12799 of 2020 is treated as the leading case. 3. The case of the petitioners is that they are sub- W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases **==> picture [22 x 8] intentionally omitted <==** staff in the Divisional office and the Branch Offices under ― the Kozhikode Division of the first respondent Life Insurance Corporation of India (for brevity hereinafter referred to as "Corporation)." They have been working on a temporary basis since 2009-2012 till date. The petitioners are aggrieved by the action of the respondents in trying to replace them with outsourced temporary employees. The respondents are trying to terminate the services of the petitioners by resorting to arbitrary and illegal methods. The Corporation has refused to consider the candidature of the petitioners for regularisation to the post of sub-staff, although they have completed more than eight years of service. The Corporation is also attempting to remove the petitioners by replacing them with fresh temporary employees to the post of sub-staff, which is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. 4. The petitioners have contended that they have W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases **==> picture [24 x 7] intentionally omitted <==** been working as sub-staff on daily wages in the Divisional Office, Branch Offices and Satellite Offices under the Kozhikode Divisional office of the Corporation. The petitioners figure as sub-staff in the muster rolls of the Corporation. The petitioners have neither been absorbed nor given temporary status. The Corporation is paying salaries to the petitioners either by vouchers or through bank transfer. Several temporary employees of the Corporation have been absorbed in service based on various judgments of the Honourable Supreme Court, including in Civil Appeal Nos.953 - 968 of 2005. The petitioners were engaged by the Corporation when it was found that sufficient candidates were not available in the respective panels for recruitment to the Class-IV Cadre. The petitioners were appointed to the post of sub-staff invoking Clause V-2 (c) of Life Insurance Corporation of India (Employment of Temporary Staff) Instructions, 1993 ― Exhibit P-4. W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases **==> picture [22 x 6] intentionally omitted <==** 5. The Corporation is now attempting to replace the petitioners by outsourcing the jobs of Class-IV employees in the different offices of the third respondent. Further enquiry has revealed that the Corporation has published Exhibit P-5 notification. Exhibit P-6 policy does not cover core jobs. The core jobs notified in Exhibit P-5 fall squarely within the realm of Exhibit P-4 Instructions, and hence they cannot be outsourced. Clause -IV of Exhibit P- 4 Instructions stipulate that one temporary employee cannot be replaced by another temporary employee, and must be replaced only by way of a regularly selected employee. The Honourable Supreme Court, as well as this Court, has prohibited replacement of one set of temporary employees, who continued in service for several years, without the aid or interference of any court order, by another set of temporary employees. The High Court of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh has interdicted the Corporation from replacing the temporary employees W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases **==> picture [23 x 6] intentionally omitted <==** by another set of temporary employees. Hence, Exhibit P- 5 may be quashed, and it may be declared that the petitioners can continue in their present occupation until they are replaced by properly selected permanent employees, pursuant to a valid recruitment. 6. The respondents 1 to 5 have filed a counter affidavit. In addition to refuting the allegations in the writ petition, they have, inter alia, contended that the petitioners are not temporary employees and were not appointed as per the Exhibit P-4 Instructions. They were appointed on a need basis and not against any sanctioned post. There is no material to substantiate the claim of the petitioners. The mere production of two or three vouchers is not sufficient to prove the alleged claim of the petitioners, that they have been in continuous employment. The petitioners are not entitled to claim regularisation in service or are they entitled to continue till a fresh appointment is made. The petitioners are W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases **==> picture [23 x 8] intentionally omitted <==** doing menial jobs on a daily wage basis. Their engagement was not through any recruitment or selection process, or is it covered by any statutory rules or instructions. The Corporation has issued Exhibit P-5 notification in line with the guidelines issued by the Insurance Regulatory Development Authority of India (in short "IRDAI") as per Exhibit R-3 (a). The guidelines reveal the nature of jobs for which the petitioners were engaged and the purpose for which Exhibit P-5 notification has been. The jobs under Exhibit P-5 fall under non-core activities. Subsequent to Exhibit R-3 (a) guidelines, Exhibit R-3 (b) circular and Exhibit R-3 (c) regulations have been framed. Exhibit-R3 (b) policy clearly defines core and non-core activities. Item No. XIX under non-core activities would cover the deployment of personnel within the premises or offices of the Corporation on a contract basis. The Corporation is entitled to outsource employment for various activities. W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases **==> picture [23 x 8] intentionally omitted <==** The petitioners were engaged for different menial jobs like cleaning, the arrangement of office files etc. They have not been engaged to do any work which is perennial in nature. If the petitioners were appointed as per Exhibit P-4 Instructions, they would have been issued with appointment letters, defining the terms of their temporary appointment. They were neither appointed nor given temporary status by the Corporation, and there is no provision to absorb or give temporary status to those engaged on a need basis. The Corporation has not maintained muster rolls for the daily wagers since they are not appointed or recruited by the Corporation on a regular or temporary basis. The High Court of Madras by Exhibit R3-(d) judgment has dismissed a similar claim. This Court, by judgment dated 15.06.2016 in W.P.(C) No.17594 of 2015, while considering a claim of similar nature, had directed the petitioners to raise an industrial dispute with regard to their claim for regularisation. The W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases **==> picture [22 x 8] intentionally omitted <==** Division Bench of this Court, by judgment dated 10.01.2017 in W.A.No.1759 of 2016, set aside that portion of the judgment in W.P.(C) No.17594 of 2015, where the Corporation was directed to permit the petitioners therein to continue in the same manner as they were being engaged till their disengagement. The petitioners have not made out a case warranting interference of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Hence, the writ petitions may be dismissed. 7. The petitioners have filed a reply affidavit refuting the assertions in the counter affidavit. According to them, the attempt of the Corporation is to include the engagements of the petitioners under Item No.XIX of Exhibit R-(3)(c) guidelines and to outsource the activities which is illegal and misleading. In the absence of regular recruitment to the post of Class-IV employees and the resultant dearth of sufficient hands, the Corporation cannot resort to recruitment under Exhibit R-3 (a). The W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases **==> picture [23 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** petitioners have reliably understood that the sanctioned cadre strength of the subordinate staff of the third respondent altogether is 190 for the 25 branches and 31 satellite offices and the one divisional office. At present, there is only one permanent sub-staff available on the Rolls, which makes it impossible for the Divisional Office, various Branches and Satellite Offices to function smoothly. It is in the above circumstances that the petitioners were engaged for the last so many years, as per Exhibit P-4 Instructions. The petitioners have been discharging duties falling under categories excluded in clause II of the instructions. The engagement of the petitioners could have been done only in accordance with Clause V-2 (c) of Exhibit P-4 Instructions. The attendance register pertaining to the 2[nd] petitioner shows that he was present in the office during the periods from December, 2015 to February, 2016. Exhibit P-9 is the monthly petty cash register maintained by the 8[th] respondent in W.P.(C) W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases **==> picture [22 x 8] intentionally omitted <==** No.14004 of 2020 and Exhibit P-10 shows that the 6[th] petitioner in the said writ petition has been paid salary and that he is a full-time employee. Hundreds of such employees, like the petitioners, are working under the various branches and satellite offices of the Kozhikode division. If they were not recruited under the Instructions, the petitioners are at a loss to understand how such employees could have worked under the third respondent for all these years. Hence, the counter affidavit filed by the respondents may be rejected, and the writ petitions may be allowed. 8. Heard Shri.C.E.Unnikrishnan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Shri.S.Easwaran, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. 9. Shri.C.E.Unnikrishnan contended that the petitioners who are fifty-five in number are employed as sub-staff under the Kozhikode Division of the Corporation, where there are 25 branches, 31 satellite offices, and one W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases **==> picture [23 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** Divisional office. Since 1993 onwards, no regular appointment has been carried out by the Corporation to Class-IV cadre, namely sub-staff. The sanctioned strength for the sub-staff is 190. Against the said sanctioned strength, there is only one permanent sub staff in the Kozhikode division. Most of the employees, who were recruited, have retired or have been promoted. Accordingly, the petitioners were engaged by the Corporation as temporary staff from 2008-2012 onwards. All of them have been appointed as per clause V-2(c) of Exhibit P-4 Instructions. The Corporation was established by an enactment. As per Section 49 of the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956. The employees have to be recruited as per the Regulations formulated by the Corporation. Under Regulation VIII, there are four sets of ― ― employees, namely Class-I officers, Class-II ― Development Officers, Class-III Clerical staff, and Class― IV Subordinate staff. It is invoking the Regulation and W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases **==> picture [23 x 8] intentionally omitted <==** Exhibit P-4 Instructions that the petitioners were appointed. The procedure by which Class-IV employees are appointed is provided under Clause V-(2) of the Exhibit P-4 Instructions. Sub-clause (6) of Clause III of Exhibit P-6 Corporate Guidelines stipulate the manner in which temporary appointments have to be followed. The contention of the Corporation in the counter affidavit that the jobs being done by the petitioners fall within non-core activities in Exhibit R-(3) (b) is fallacious and unsustainable in law. He relied on paragraph 25 of the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in **State of Haryana and Ors vs. Piara Singh and Ors** [(1992) 4 SCC 118] and contended that an ad hoc or temporary employee should not be replaced by another ad hoc or temporary employee. He also relied on paragraph 17 of the decision in **The Workmen of Bhurkunda Colliery of M/s Central Coalfields Ltd. vs. The Management of Bhurkenda Colliery of Central Coalfields Ltd.** W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases **==> picture [24 x 8] intentionally omitted <==** [(2006) 3 SCC 297] and paragraph 7 of the judgment in **Hindustan Machine Tools v. M.Rangareddy** [(2000) 7 SCC 741], wherein the ratio in **Piara Singh** (cited supra) have been followed. He also relied on the decision in **Satya Prakash v. State of Bihar and others** [(2010) 4 SCC 1917]. The sum and substance of his argument was that, Exhibit P-5 notification issued by the Corporation to replace the petitioners with another set of temporary employees is grossly erroneous, arbitrary, and illegal. He prayed that the writ petitions be allowed by quashing Exhibit P-5 notification and permit the petitioners to continue as sub-staff in the Corporation until the regular appointment is carried out. 10. Shri.S.Easwaran argued that the entire burden of proof to establish that the petitioners were appointed as per Clause V-2 (c) of Exhibit P-4 Instructions is on the petitioners. There is no material on record to substantiate that the petitioners are the temporary staff of the W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases **==> picture [22 x 8] intentionally omitted <==** Corporation. Clause V of Exhibit P-4 is not applicable in view of Clause VIII because temporary employment can only be made against a substantive vacancy, whether it is regular or ad hoc. Clause VI states the duration of the temporary employment, i.e., one temporary employee cannot be replaced any another temporary employee, and he must be replaced only by a regularly selected employee. The entire burden of proof to substantiate that the petitioners are temporary employees has to be proved by them. He also drove the attention of this Court to the definitions of various categories under Clause III of Exhibit P-4. If the petitioners were employed as temporary staff, the Corporation would have certainly issued an appointment letter in the format given in Exhibit R-3 (e). The petitioners have produced some unauthenticated vouchers and slips, which prove that they were employed as daily wagers for a few days in a month. The petitioners cannot claim themselves to be W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases **==> picture [23 x 8] intentionally omitted <==** temporary employees of the Corporation based on the disputed unauthenticated documents. The High Court of Madras in Exhibit R-3 (d) judgment, an identical case, has held that employees claiming regularisation have to be appointed in pursuance of regular recruitment in accordance with relevant rules in an open competitive process, that too against sanctioned vacant posts. The Division Bench of this Court in Exhibit R-3 (e) judgment had directed similarly situated employees to work out their remedies under the Industrial Disputes Act. The learned Standing Counsel invited the attention of this Court to the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in **Secretary, State of Karnataka and Ors v. Umadevi and Ors** [(2006) 4 SCC 1] wherein it has been held that the right to be treated equally with other employees employed on daily wages cannot be extended to claim for equal treatment with those who are regularly employed. He also relied on paragraph 8 of the decision in **State of** W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..33.. **Tamil Nadu v. Singamuthu** [(2017) 4 SCC 113] wherein it has been held that that continuance in service for a long period on part-time or temporary basis confers no right to seek regularisation in service. He further contended that unless there is an appointment letter issued in the format enclosed in Exhibit R-(3) e, the petitioners cannot claim to be temporary employees of the Corporation. In the cases on hand, there is no record for the Court to come to the conclusion that the petitioners are temporary employees. Thus, the petitioners cannot be heard to contend that they cannot be replaced with employees who are to be outsourced through Exhibit P-5 notification. The learned Standing Counsel also drew the attention of this Court to the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority Act, 1999. According to him, after the said enactment, the insurance companies are regulated by the said Act. It is in line with the said enactment that the IRDAI has issued W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases **==> picture [23 x 8] intentionally omitted <==** Exhibit R-(3) (a) guidelines, on outsourcing of activities by insurance companies followed by Exhibit R-(3) (c) Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India (Outsourcing of Activities by Indian Insurers) Regulations, 2017. The said Regulations enable the insurance companies to outsource non-core activities that find a place in the policy of outsourcing in Exhibit R-(3) (b) guidelines. The Corporation has issued Exhibit P-5 notification seeking for the outsourcing of jobs in the Corporation which fall within non-core activities. Thus, Exhibit P-5 notification is legal and in consonance with Exhibit R (3) (a) to R-(3) (c). Hence he prayed that the writ petitions may be dismissed. 11. The points that arise for consideration in these writ petitions are: (i) whether the petitioners are temporary employees of the Corporation who have been recruited through a valid recruitment process W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases **==> picture [22 x 8] intentionally omitted <==** (ii) whether Exhibit P-5 notification published by the Corporation inviting tenders from agencies/contractors for providing services of office upkeep/housekeeping services to its Divisional Office, Branch Offices and Satellite Offices, RMF, Guest Houses, etc., is valid and legal. (iii) Whether the petitioners are entitled to a declaration that they are entitled to continue in their present occupation until they are replaced by permanent employees, through a valid recruitment process. 12. As the above points are intertwined, they are considered and decided together. 13. The petitioners claim that they were appointed as sub-staff by the Corporation as per the Life Insurance Corporation of India (Employment of Temporary Staff) ― Instructions, 1993 dated 28.06.1993 Exhibit P-4/Exhibit ― R-3 (e) hereinafter referred to as Instructions. 14. Sub-clauses (b), (d), (e) and (i) of Clause III of W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases **==> picture [23 x 10] intentionally omitted <==** the Instructions defines a 'casual employee', 'part-time employee', 'persons on contract basis' and 'temporary staff', respectively, which reads as follows:- (i) Clause III (b) 'Casual employee' means a person who is employed for work of an occasional or intermittent nature, whether he be paid on a daily rate basis or otherwise. (ii) Clause III (d) 'Part-time employee means a person appointed other than on a whole time basis. (iii) Clause III (e) 'Persons on contract basis' or 'Selfcontrators' means persons engaged on any particular assignment or for the performance of any specific work on payment of a lump sum consideration even it such payment be staggered over a period of time and whose engagement is on the basis of a contract entered into by the Corporation and such contractor. Clause III (i) 'Temporary Staff' means **a person/s who is/are employed on a temporary basis or against a** W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..37.. ## **temporary vacancy for a specified period.** 15. Clause V (2) of the Instructions reads thus: ## “2. **Employment in Class IV Posts:-** a. The panels prepared under the Recruitment Instructions by the Divisional Office will be made available to all the Branch Offices under it. Whenever a need arise for temporary employment a candidate who is residing in the area of the concerned Branch and who is next in ranking in the panel will be offered temporary employment. If however such a candidate is not available for temporary employment or is not willing to accept the temporary employment, the order of ranking may be departed from. b. In the event such an arrangement is not possible after recording the reasons for the departure from the procedure mentioned in the immediately preceding paragraph, the Sr./Divisional Manager may authorize, in writing the Sr./Branch Manager to employ temporary staff from among persons who satisfy all the eligibility conditions for recruitment of Class IV W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..38.. Staff under the Recruitment instructions through the local Employment Exchange. c. Where however the need is immediate and it is not possible to follow the above procedure the **Sr./Branch Manager may, after recording the steps taken to employ temporary staff in accordance with the provisions above, employ temporary staff from out of the person available locally provided such a person satisfies all the eligibility conditions for recruitment of staff to the particular post under the Recruitment Instruction.** Since in such appointments neither the procedure prescribed under the Recruitment Instructions is adhered to nor the safeguards in the procedure under sub-para (b) above are available in order to ensure that the appointments are not only done in a fair manner, but are also perceived to be so the temporary staff so employed should not be the relative of any serving or retired employee of the Corporation. Needless to add, the occasion for such employment should be very rare and the duration of such employment should also be very short.” W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..39.. 16. Clause VIII of the Instructions reads as follows: ## “ **VIII. Tenure of Employment:** **Though temporary employment can be made only against a vacancy whether regular or adhoc,** since no temporary employee has a right to the post held by him such temporary employment will automatically come to an end on the expiry of the period for which he is employed if however on account of any misconduct it becomes necessary to terminate such employment before the expiry of the period for which he is employed it may be done only after giving him an opportunity to defend himself against the charge. While this does not mean a departmental enquiry in terms of Regulation 39 of the (Staff) Regulations it is necessary that he be issued a charge sheet and allowed an opportunity to defend the charges in an oral enquiry. “ 17. In the letter dated 28.06.1993 issued by the Executive Director of the Corporation along with the W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..40.. Instructions, it was categorically mentioned in Clauses 5 and 6 as follows: “5. (a) **In order to ensure effective control over temporary employment every office should maintain a register of temporary employment as per the specimen enclosed. All instances of temporary employment must be entered in this register. Further, at the close of every month each Branch Office should send a statement to the Divisional Office giving therein the details of the temporary employment made in** the Branch - whether made by the Branch itself or by the Divisional Office. On receipt of this statement, the Divisional Office shall scrutinise the same and satisfy itself that the temporary employment made by the Branch Office is in order in each instance. b) At the end of each month, the Divisional Office, on the basis of the register maintained by them and on the basis of the returns received from the Branch Offices should prepare a W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases **==> picture [22 x 8] intentionally omitted <==** consolidated statement giving therein the details of all the temporary employment made and send the same to the Zonal Office so as to enable the Zonal Office to ensure not only that the occasions for employment on temporary basis are kept to the minimum but also that the appointments have been made strictly in accordance with the Temporary Employment Instructions. 6. **The persons who are employed on temporary basis have to be issued employment letters as per the specimen enclosed. In those cases where the Branch Offices make the temporary employment, the employment letters can be issued by the Sr./Branch Manager but such appointments should be ratified by the Sr./Divisional Manager** (who is the appointing authority) immediately after such appointment is made.” 18. Therefore, going by the definitions in Clause III and the stipulation in Clause V of the Instructions, it is imperative that a temporary employee has to be W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases **==> picture [23 x 8] intentionally omitted <==** appointed to a temporary post for a specified period that too after the Sr/Branch Manager records the steps taken to employ a temporary employee and he being satisfied that the candidate fulfills the eligibility conditions for regular appointment. In addition to the above, as per paragraphs 5 and 6 of the letter dated 28.06.1993 (appended to Exhibit R-3 (e)) the candidate has to be issued with an appointment letter as per the format, and the details have to be forwarded to the Divisional as well as the Zonal Offices of the Corporation. In the format appended to Exhibit R-3 (e) it is seen that temporary employees are given casual leave, privilege leave, earned leave, etc. 19. It is the specific case of the petitioners that they have been appointed as temporary employees invoking Clause V (2) (c) of the Exhibit P-4/Exhibit R-3 (e) Instructions. If that is the case, certainly, the petitioners have to produce their appointment letters issued as per W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases **==> picture [23 x 8] intentionally omitted <==** paragraphs 5 and 6 of the letter dated 28.06.1993, which is conspicuously absent. The petitioners have produced certain payment vouchers and unauthenticated daily attendance registers to prove their claims. The said documents only substantiate that the petitioners are casual employees, working on intermittent basis on daily wages. Such employees only fall within the definition of Clause III (b) of the Exhibit P-4/Exhibit R-3 (e) Instructions. In the 1[st] paragraph of the synopsis of all the writ petitions, the petitioners have averred that they are "temporary employees," but in the 2[nd] paragraph, they have stated that they are working as "daily wagers" for more than eight years. The mixed use of the expressions "temporary employees" and "daily wagers" substantiate that even the petitioners are not sure of their engagement in the Corporation. But, the mixed usage has a bearing in the context of the present cases. 20. The learned counsel for the petitioners had W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases **==> picture [23 x 8] intentionally omitted <==** placed strong reliance on paragraph 25 of **State of Haryana and Ors vs. Piara Singh and Ors** (cited supra) and contended that an ad hoc or temporary employees should not be replaced by another set of ad hoc or temporary employees. However, in paragraphs 33 of the judgment, the Honourable Supreme Court held thus: **"Now coming to the direction that all those ad hoc/temporary employees who have continued for more than a year should be regularised, we find it difficult to sustain it. The direction has been given without reference to the existence of a vacancy. The direction in effect means that every ad hoc/temporary employee who has been continued for one year should be regularised even though (a) no vacancy is available for him – which means creation of a vacancy (b) he was not sponsored by the Employment Exchange nor was he appointed in pursuance of a notification calling for applications which** W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..45.. **means he had centered by a back-door (c) he was not eligible and/or qualified for post at the time of his appointment (d) his record of service since his appointment is not satisfactory.** These are in addition to some of the problems indicated by us in para 25, which would arise from giving of such blanket orders. None of the decisions relied upon by the High Court justify such wholesale, unconditional orders. Moreover, from the mere continuation of an ad hoc employee for one year, it cannot be presumed that there is need for a regular post. Such a presumption may be justified only when such continuance extends to several years. Further, there can be no 'rule of thumb' in such matters. Conditions and circumstances of one unit may not be the same as of the other. Just because in one case, a direction was given to regularise employees who have put in one year's service as far as possible and subject to fulfilling the qualifications, it cannot be held that in each and every case such a direction must follow irrespective of and without taking into account the other relevant circumstances and considerations. The relief must be moulded in W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..46.. each case having regard to all the relevant facts and circumstances of that case. It cannot be a mechanical act but a judicious one Judged from this standpoint, the impugned directions must be held to be totally untenable and unsustainable.” (emphasis given) " 21. In paragraph 8 of **State of Tamil Nadu v. Singamuthu** [(2017) 4 SCC 113], the Honourable Supreme Court laid down as follows: "8 Part-time of casual employment is meant to serve the exigencies of administration. **It is a settled principle of law that continuance in service for long period on part-time or temporary basis confers no right to seek regularisation in service. The person who is engaged on temporary or casual basis is well aware of the nature of his employment and he consciously accepted the same at the time of seeking employment.** Generally, while directing that temporary or part-time appointments be regularised or made permanent, the courts are swayed by the long period of W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases **==> picture [22 x 8] intentionally omitted <==** service rendered by the employees. However, this may not be always a correct approach to adopt especially when the scheme of regularisation is missing from the rule book and regularisation casts huge financial implications on public exchequer.” (emphasis given) " 22. Going by the ratio decidendi in the above-cited precedents, the law is well settled that merely because a person claims to be in continuous service for a long period, on part-time basis, it does not confer on him any right to seek regularisation of service. The courts should not be swayed by a long period, especially when the scheme of regularisation is absent. Further, there can be no rule of the thumb particularly without the existence of a vacancy. 23. With the pleadings and materials on record in these writ petitions, principally the non-production of the appointment letters and that the petitioners have not W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases **==> picture [24 x 10] intentionally omitted <==** established that they were appointed against regular posts on a temporary basis, it is not possible for this Court, in a proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to come to a conclusion that the petitioners are temporary employees of the Corporation. 24. It may be true that the Honourable Supreme Court had, on earlier occasions in Civil Appeal Nos.968 of 2005 and 4703-4735 of 2016, regularised the service of temporary employees. But, the regularisation was done by the Honourable Supreme Court, in the exercise of its plenary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, that too at the instance of the scheme put forth by the Corporation, and after the conduct of limited departmental examinations. But, that is not the case of the petitioners here. They claim to be temporary employees, and on that basis, they seek a declaration that they should not be replaced by another set of ad hoc/temporary employees. The said prayer is deceptive W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases **==> picture [23 x 8] intentionally omitted <==** for the reason that the petitioners are aware that no regular appointment to the post of sub-staff has taken place in the Divisional office of Corporation since 1993 and making use of the same, the petitioners can continue in the present stalemate. It is following the judgment of the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos.4703-4735 of 2016, that the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.64 of 2020 directed the petitioners in W.P.(C) No.42121 of 2018 to be regularised, which is not the case here. However, it was observed that the judgment shall not be treated as a precedent. 25. Therefore, on a cumulative appreciation of the pleadings and materials on record and the precedents cited above, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioners are not temporary employees of the Corporation, recruited through a valid recruitment process to temporary posts. Thus, there is no legal bar in the Corporation going ahead with Exhibit P-5 notification. W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases **==> picture [23 x 8] intentionally omitted <==** The petitioners are not entitled to a declaration that they are entitled to continue in their present occupation until they are replaced with permanent employees. Nevertheless, the above findings will not prejudice the right of the petitioners to invoke remedies under the Industrial Disputes Act, as permitted by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.1759 of 2017. In the result, these writ petitions are dismissed but without prejudice the right of the petitioners to seek appropriate remedies under the Industrial Disputes Act. kkj Sd/- **C.S.DIAS, JUDGE** W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..51.. ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12799/2020** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 24.08.2009 FOR 6 DAYS FROM 17.08.2009 TO 22.08.2009 OF THE 1ST PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P1 (A) TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER DATED 26.06.2020 OF THE 1ST PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER OF THE 2ND PETITIONER DATED 21.04.2012 FOR 10 DAYS FROM 13.04.2012 TO 21.04.2012.** - **EXHIBIT P2 (A) TRUE COPY OF THE 2ND PETITIONER LATEST VOUCHER DATED 26.06.2020 OF THE 2ND PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER OF THE 3RD PETITIONER DATED 28.06.2011 FOR 28 DAYS FROM 01.06.2011 TO 28.06.2011.** - **EXHIBIT P3 (A) THE TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER OF THE 3RD PETITIONER DATED 31.03.2020.** - **EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LIC OF INDIA (EMPLOYMENT OF TEMPORARY STAFF), INSTRUCTIONS, 1993.** **EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE TENDER NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 31.05.2020. EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE CORPORATE GUIDE LINES 2020-2021 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.** W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..52.. **EXHIBIT P7 ORDERS OF HONBLE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR THE STATE OF TELENGANA AND STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH IN IA. NO. 1 OF 2018 IN WPC NO. 4635 OF 2018.** ## **RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS** **EXHIBIT R3(a): TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.IRDA/LIFE/CIR/GLD/013/02/2011 DATED 1.2.2011 EXHIBIT R3(b): TRUE COPY OF POLICY ON OUTSOURCING 2015 EXHIBIT R3(c): TRUE COPY OF THE INSURANCE REGULATORY DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF INDIA (OUTSOURCING OF THE ACTIVITIES BY INDIAN INSURERS) REGULATIONS 2017 EXHIBIT R3(d) TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 28.02.2019 IN WP NO.29529 OF 2018 OF THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT AT MADRAS EXHIBIT R3(e) TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 10.01.2017 IN WA 1759/2016 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT** W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..53.. ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13725/2020** **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1** **TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 29.12.2012 OF THE 1ST PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P1(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LAST VOUCHER DATED 23.6.2020 OF THE 1ST PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 21.11.2009 OF THE 2ND PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P2(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LAST VOUCHER DATED 20.6.2020 OF THE 2ND PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 3.7.2012 OF 5TH RESPONDENT EVIDENCING THE WORKING OF THE 3RD PETITIONER FROM 12.9.2010.** **EXHIBIT P3(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LAST VOUCHER DATED 8.5.2010 OF THE 3RD PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P4** **TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 8.5.2010 OF THE 4TH PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P4(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LAST VOUCHER DATED 20.6.2020 OF THE 4TH PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P5** **TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 27.12.2014 OF THE 5TH PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P5(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LAST VOUCHER DATED 20.6.2020 OF THE 5THPETITIONER.** W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..54.. **EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE VOUCHER DATED 31.8.2013 OF 5TH RESPONDENT EVIDENCING THE WORKING OF THE 6TH PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P6(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LAST RECEIPT DATED 26.6.2020 OF THE 6TH PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 17.1.2014 OF THE 7TH PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P7(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LAST VOUCHER DATED 26.6.2020 OF THE 7THPETITIONER. EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 1.3.2014 OF THE 8TH PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P8(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LAST VOUCHER DATED 26.6.2020 OF THE 8th PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 3.1.2014 OF THE 9TH PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P9(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LAST VOUCHER DATED 26.6.2020 OF THE 9TH PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 8.4.2011 OF THE TENTH PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P10(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LAST VOUCHER OF THE 10TH PETITIONER DATED 26.6.2020.** - **EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 6.8.2011 OF THE ELEVENTH PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P11(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LAST VOUCHER DATED 26.6.2020 OF THE ELEVENTH PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 13.8.2011 OF THE 12TH PETITIONER.** W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..55.. **EXHIBIT P12(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LAST VOUCHER DATED 26.6.2020 OF THE TWELTH PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P13 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 6.8.2011 OF THE 13TH PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P13(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LAST VOUCHER DATED 26.6.2020 OF THE 13TH PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 6.8.2011 OF THE 14TH PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P14(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LAST VOUCHER DATED 26.6.2020 OF THE 14TH PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P15 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 2.8.2014 OF THE 15TH PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P15(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LAST VOUCHER DATED 26.6.2020 OF THE 15TH PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P16 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 31.10.2013 OF THE 16TH PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P16(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LAST VOUCHER DATED 26.6.2020 OF THE 16TH PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P17 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 19.1.2015 OF THE 17TH PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P18 TRUE COPY OF THE LIC OF INDIA (EMPLOYMENT OF TEMPORARY STAFF) INSTRUCTIONS, 1993.** **EXHIBIT P19 TRUE COPY OF THE TENDER NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 31.5.2020.** W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..56.. ## **EXHIBIT P20** **A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE CORPORATE GUIDE LINES 2020-201 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.** **EXHIBIT P21 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDERS OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR THE STATE OF TELENGANA AND STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH INIA NO.1 OF 2018 IN WP.NO.4635 OF 2018.** ## **RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS** **EXHIBIT R3(a): TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.IRDA/LIFE/CIR/GLD/013/02/2011 DATED 1.2.2011 EXHIBIT R3(b): TRUE COPY OF POLICY ON OUTSOURCING 2015 EXHIBIT R3(c): TRUE COPY OF THE INSURANCE REGULATORY DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF INDIA (OUTSOURCING OF THE ACTIVITIES BY INDIAN INSURERS) REGULATIONS 2017 EXHIBIT R3(d) TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 28.02.2019 IN WP NO.29529 OF 2018 OF THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT AT MADRAS EXHIBIT R3(e) TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 10.01.2017 IN WA 1759/2016 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT** W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..57.. ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13757/2020** **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1** **TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 31/12/2010 OF THE 1ST PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P1(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER DATED 26/06/2020 OF THE 1ST PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 13/02/2010 OF THE 2ND PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P2(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER DATED 12/06/2020 OF THE 2ND PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE IMPREST CASH EXPENSE DETAILS DATED 05/11/2012 OF 5TH RESPONDENT EVIDENCING THE ENGAGEMENT OF THE 3RD PETITIONER FROM 05/11/2012.** **EXHIBIT P3(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER DATED 20/02/2020 OF THE 3RD PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 25/02/2012 OF THE 4TH PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P4(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER DATED 26/06/2020 OF THE 4TH PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 12/05/2007 OF THE 5TH PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P5(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER DATED 26/06/2020 OF THE 5TH PETITIONER.** ## W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..58.. ## **EXHIBIT P6** **TRUE COPY OF THE VOUCHER DATED 05/04/2007 OF 6TH RESPONDENT EVIDENCING THE WORKING OF THE 6TH PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P6(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER DATED 26/06/2020 OF THE 6TH PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF THE REGISTER OF DAILY WAGE APPOINTMENTS EVIDENCING THE ENGAGEMENT OF THE 7TH PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P7(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER DATED 26/06/2020 OF THE 7TH PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF THE REGISTER OF DAILY WAGE APPOINTMENTS EVIDENCING THE ENGAGEMENT OF THE 8TH PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P8(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER DATED 26/06/2020 OF THE 8TH PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF THE REGISTER OF DAILY WAGE APPOINTMENTS EVIDENCING THE APPOINTMENT OF 9TH PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P9(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER DATED 26/06/2020 OF THE 9TH PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P10** - **TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF THE REGISTER OF DAILY WAGE APPOINTMENTS EVIDENCING THE APPOINTMENT OF 10TH PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P10(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER DATED 26/06/2020 OF THE 10TH PETITIONER.** W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..59.. ## **EXHIBIT P11** **THE TRUE COPY OF EXTRACT OF THE REGISTER OF DAILY WAGE APPOINTMENTS EVIDENCING THE APPOINTMENT OF 11TH PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P11(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER DATED 26/06/2020 OF THE 11TH PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P12 THE TRUE COPY OF FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 10/04/2020 OF THE 12TH PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P12(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER DATED 26/06/2020 OF THE 12TH PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P13 THE TRUE COPY OF FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 29/04/2017 OF THE 13TH PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P13(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER DATED 26/06/2020 OF THE 13TH PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P14 THE TRUE COPY OF FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 07/05/2012 OF THE 14TH PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P14(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER DATED 12/06/2020 OF THE 14TH PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P15 THE TRUE COPY OF FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 01/01/2011 OF THE 15TH PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P15(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER DATED 12/06/2020 OF THE 15TH PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P16 THE TRUE COPY OF FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 22/05/2010 OF THE 16TH PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P16(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER DATED 20/06/2020 OF THE 16TH PETITIONER.** W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..60.. **EXHIBIT P17 THE TRUE COPY OF FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 20/03/2010 OF THE 17TH PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P17(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER DATED 26/06/2020 OF THE 17TH PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P18 THE TRUE COPY OF FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 09/06/2012 OF THE 18TH PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P18(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER DATED 26/06/2020 OF THE 18TH PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P19 TRUE COPY OF THE 'LIC OF INDIA (EMPLOYMENT OF TEMPORARY STAFF) INSTRUCTIONS, 1993.** - **EXHIBIT P20 TRUE COPY OF THE TENDER NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 31/05/2020.** - **EXHIBIT P21 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE CORPORATE GUIDE LINES 2020-2021 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P22 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDERS OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR THE STATE OF TELENGANA AND STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH IN IA NO.1 OF 2018 IN WP NO.4635 OF 2018.** - **EXHIBIT P23 TRUE COPY OF PAGE NO.17 OF THE TENDER DOCUMENT FOR OFFICE UPKEEP AND HOUSE KEEPING SERVICES REF: LIC/DO/KKD DATED 31ST MAY 2020.** **EXHIBIT P24 TRUE COPY OF THE ATTENDANCE REGISTER OF THE 2ND PETITIONER IN W.P.(C) 12799/2020 FOR THE PERIODS OF DECEMBER 2015, JANUARY AND FEBRUARY 2016.** W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..61.. ## **EXHIBIT P25** **TRUE COPY OF AN EXTRACT FROM ONE OF THE MONTHLY PETTY CASH REGISTER MAINTAINED BY THE 8TH RESPONDENT IN W.P.(C) 14004/2020.** **RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT R3(a): TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.IRDA/LIFE/CIR/GLD/013/02/2011 DATED 1.2.2011 EXHIBIT R3(b): TRUE COPY OF POLICY ON OUTSOURCING 2015 EXHIBIT R3(c): TRUE COPY OF THE INSURANCE REGULATORY DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF INDIA (OUTSOURCING OF THE ACTIVITIES BY INDIAN INSURERS) REGULATIONS 2017 EXHIBIT R3(d) TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 28.02.2019 IN WP NO.29529 OF 2018 OF THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT AT MADRAS EXHIBIT R3(e) TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 10.01.2017 IN WA 1759/2016 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT** W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..62.. ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14004/2020** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 15.10.2012 OF THE 1ST PETITIONER** **EXHIBIT P1A TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER DATED 26.06.2020 OF THE 1ST PETITIONER** - **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER OF THE 2ND PETITIONER DATED 02.05.2011** - **EXHIBIT P2A TRUE COPY OF THE 2ND PETITIONER LATEST VOUCHER DATED 22.06.2020 OF THE 2ND PETITIONER** - **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER OF THE 3RD PETITIONER DATED 14.01.2011** - **EXHIBIT P3A THE TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER OF THE 3RD PETITIONER DATED 24.06.2020** - **EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER DATED OF THE 2ND PETITIONER DATED 28.07.2012** - **EXHIBIT P4A TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER OF THE 4TH PETITIONER DATED 25.06.2020** - **EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE REGISTER EVIDENCING THE ENGAGEMENT OF THE 5TH PETITIONER ON 08.09.2007** - **EXHIBIT P5A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE REGISTER EVIDENCING THE ENGAGEMENT OF THE 5TH PETITIONER ON 01.06.2010** - **EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE ATTENDANCE REGISTER EVIDENCING THE ENGAGEMENT OF THE 6TH PETITIONER IN JULY 2012** W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..63.. **EXHIBIT P6A** **TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER DATED 23.06.2020 OF THE 6TH PETITIONER** **EXHIBIT P7** **TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST VOUCHER DATED 15.10.2013 OF THE 7TH** **EXHIBIT P7A** **TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER DATED OF THE 7TH PETITIONER DATED 26.06.2020** **EXHIBIT P8** **TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST VOUCHER DATED 31.03.2014 OF THE 8TH PETITIONER** **EXHIBIT P8A TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER DATED OF THE 8TH PETITIONER DATED 26.06.2020** **EXHIBIT P9** **A TRUE COPY OF LIC OF INDIA (EMPLOYMENT OF TEMPORARY STAFF) INSTRUCTIONS, 1993** - **EXHIBIT P10 A TRUE COPY TENDER NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 31.05.2020** - **EXHIBIT P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE CORPORATE GUIDE LINES 2020-201 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT** - **EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR THE STATE OF TELENGANA AND STATE OF ANDRA PRADESH IN IA NO.1 OF 20218 IN WP NO.4635 OF 2018** **EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF PAGE NO.17 OF THE TENDER DOCUMENT FOR OFFICE UPKEEP AND HOUSE KEEPING SERVICES REF.LIC/DO/KKD DATED 31ST MAY 2020.** ## W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..64.. ## **EXHIBIT P14** **TRUE COPY OF THE ATTENDANCE REGISTER OF THE 2ND PETITIONER IN WPC.NO.12799/2020 FOR THE PERIODS OF DECEMBER 2015, JANUARY AND FEBRUARY 2016.** ## **EXHIBIT P15** **TRUE COPY OF AN EXTRACT FROM ONE OF THE MONTHLY PETTY CASH REGISTER MAINTAINED BY THE 8TH RESPONDENT IN WPC.NO.14004/2020.** ## **RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS** **EXHIBIT R3(a): TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.IRDA/LIFE/CIR/GLD/013/02/2011 DATED 1.2.2011 EXHIBIT R3(b): TRUE COPY OF POLICY ON OUTSOURCING 2015 EXHIBIT R3(c): TRUE COPY OF THE INSURANCE REGULATORY DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF INDIA (OUTSOURCING OF THE ACTIVITIES BY INDIAN INSURERS) REGULATIONS 2017 EXHIBIT R3(d) TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 28.02.2019 IN WP NO.29529 OF 2018 OF THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT AT MADRAS EXHIBIT R3(e) TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 10.01.2017 IN WA 1759/2016 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT** W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..65.. ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14067/2020** **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1** **TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 30.06.2012 OF THE 1ST PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P1(a) TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER DATED 26.06.2020 OF THE 1ST PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 24.06.2012 OF THE 2ND PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P2(a) TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER DATED 26.06.2020 OF THE 2ND PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 30.06.2012 OF HTE 3RD PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P3(a) TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER DATED 26.06.2020 OF THE 3RD PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 30.06.2012 OF THE 4TH PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P4(a) TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER DATED 26.06.2020 OF THE 4TH PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P4(a) TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER DATED 26.06.2020 OF THE 4TH PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 30.06.2012 OF THE 5TH PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P5(a) TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER OF THE 5TH PETITIONER DATED 26.06.2020.** ## W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..66.. **EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER DATED 10.01.2015 OF THE 6TH PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P6(a) TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER OF THE 6TH PETITIONER DATED 23.06.2020.** - **EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE LIC OF INDIA (EMPLOYMENT OF TEMPORARY STAFF) INSTRUCTIONS, 1993.** **EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE TENDER NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 31.05.2020. EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE CORPORATE GUIDE LINES 2020-2021 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDERS HONBL'E HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR THE STATE OF TELENGANA AND STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH IN IA NO.1 OF 2018 IN WP NO.4635 OF 2018. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT R3(a): TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.IRDA/LIFE/CIR/GLD/013/02/2011 DATED 1.2.2011 EXHIBIT R3(b): TRUE COPY OF POLICY ON OUTSOURCING 2015 EXHIBIT R3(c): TRUE COPY OF THE INSURANCE REGULATORY DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF INDIA (OUTSOURCING OF THE ACTIVITIES BY INDIAN INSURERS) REGULATIONS 2017 EXHIBIT R3(d) TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 28.02.2019 IN WP NO.29529 OF 2018 OF THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT AT MADRAS EXHIBIT R3(e) TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 10.01.2017 IN WA 1759/2016 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT** W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..67.. ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14401/2020** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER OF THE 1ST PETITIONER DATED 09.04.2010.** **EXHIBIT P1 (A) TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER DATED 07.02.2020 OF THE 1ST PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER OF THE 2ND PETITIONER DATED 09.02.2010.** **EXHIBIT P2 (A) TRUE COPY OF THE 2ND PETITIONER LATEST VOUCHER DATED 15.06.2020 OF THE 2ND PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAYMENT VOUCHER OF THE 3RD PETITIONER DATED 16.09.2011.** **EXHIBIT P3 (A) THE TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST VOUCHER OF THE 3RD PETITIONER DATED 03.07.2020.** **EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF LIC OF INDIA EMPLOYMENT OF TEMPORARY STAFF, INSTRUCTIONS, 1993.** **EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY TENDER NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 31.05.2020. EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE CORPORATE GUIDE LINES 2020-2021 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.** W.P.(C)No.12799 of 2020 & conn.cases ..68.. ## **EXHIBIT P7** **TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF HONBLE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR THE STATE OF TELENGANA AND STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH IN IA NO. 1 OF 2018 IN WPC NO. 4635 OF 2018.** ## **RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS'** **EXHIBIT R3(a): TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.IRDA/LIFE/CIR/GLD/013/02/2011 DATED 1.2.2011 EXHIBIT R3(b): TRUE COPY OF POLICY ON OUTSOURCING 2015 EXHIBIT R3(c): TRUE COPY OF THE INSURANCE REGULATORY DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF INDIA (OUTSOURCING OF THE ACTIVITIES BY INDIAN INSURERS) REGULATIONS 2017 EXHIBIT R3(d) TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 28.02.2019 IN WP NO.29529 OF 2018 OF THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT AT MADRAS EXHIBIT R3(e) TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 10.01.2017 IN WA 1759/2016 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT**