ORDER KARAMAT NAZIR BHANDARI, J. - This order will dispose of Writ Petition No. 13482/98 and 18376/98.
2. Undisputedly petitioners were employed on contract basis in connection with development project financed by Asian Development Bank in 1991. The appointment was initially for six months and was extended thereafter until 31.12.1997. Petitioner's claim that the life of project was extended up to 30.6.1998 and as the petitioners also rendered their services up to that date, the petitioners are entitled to the payment of salary for the period 1.1.1998 to 30.6.1998.
3. In the report and para were comments, the claim that either the project or the services of the petitioners were extended up to 30.6.1998 is denied. It is asserted that on resubmission of the summary, the Chief Minister did not extend the project/the services beyond 31.12.1997.
4. The controversy in the circumstances is factual. Even otherwise, it is not disputed that petitioners' employment was contractual and right to receive salary has accrued to the petitioners under the contract and not under any law. Contractual rights cannot be enforced in writ jurisdiction. On this ground alone Writ Petition No. 13482/98 is dismissed.
5. In Writ Petition No. 18376/98, the same petitioner prays for a direction to the respondent to absorb, the petitioner in service. Learned counsel has pressed that inspire of expiry of the period of project, many persons have been absorbed in regular departments. The claim is denied in the report and para were comments submitted under the signatures of Secretary Livestock. In the circumstances, it will not be possible for this Court to direct the respondent to absorb the petitioner in regular employment of the department.
6. However, if the petitioner feels that he has a case in view of the assertion that some other persons similarly placed were absorbed, the petitioner may make a representation to respondent No. 2 and it is expected that such a representation, when made will be duly considered and disposed of in accordance with law.
7. Both the petitions are decided in the above manner. No order as to costs.