### Contractual Employees in Project-Based Schemes Have No Indefeasible Right to Continued Employment Post-Scheme Completion

The petitioners were contractual employees engaged under a specific government scheme (Gujarat Urban Livelihood Mission)

They filed this writ petition seeking protection of their service and regularisation. At the time of admission on 09.10.2018, the petitioners stated their case was identical to SCA No. 19872 of 2017, leading the Court to grant a status-quo order regarding their service

During the pendency of this petition, the Gujarat High Court and the Supreme Court dismissed the similar matters in SCA No. 19872 of 2017 and SCA No. 10346 of 2014, ruling against the contractual employees

The current scheme is slated to end on 31.05.2026

1. Whether the petitioners have an indefeasible right to continue in employment or seek regularisation after the dismissal of similar precedent-setting cases

2. Whether the respondents are liable to pay revised salaries and arrears to certain petitioners (Nos. 2, 18, 19, and 20) despite the interim status-quo order

The court applied the principle of judicial consistency and stare decisis regarding contractual government schemes, noting that project-based employees do not possess an indefeasible right to continued employment once the scheme concludes

The court relied on the precedent set in Special Civil Application No. 19872 of 2017 (confirmed in LPA No. 849/2025 and by the Supreme Court) and SCA No. 10346 of 2014, which established that similarly situated contractual petitioners are not entitled to the reliefs sought

The court reasoned that since the petitioners originally secured an interim order by claiming their case was identical to SCA No. 19872 of 2017, they must accept the same fate now that the latter case has been dismissed by both the Division Bench and the Supreme Court

Regarding the continued nature of the scheme, the court held that mere name changes or extensions of a project do not grant contractual staff a permanent right to remain

Furthermore, the court criticized the respondents for misinterpreting the "status-quo" order as a justification to withhold salary revisions; it clarified that an order to maintain service conditions does not freeze a worker's right to receive federally mandated wage revisions (from ₹10,000 to ₹15,000) for work actually performed

The court partly allowed Civil Applications No. 1 of 2021 and 1 of 2026, directing Rajkot Municipal Corporation and Jetpur Municipality to calculate and pay salary arrears and revised wages to Petitioner Nos. 2, 18, 19, and 20 by 31.05.2026. The respondent-Mission was directed to release necessary grants to the local bodies for these payments. Rule discharged