r equi r ement s of Ar t i cl e 14 r ead wi t h Ar t i cl e 16 of t he Const i t ut i on. Ther ef or e, consi st ent wi t h t he scheme f or publ i c empl oyment , t hi s Cour t whi l e l ayi ng down t he l aw, has necessar i l y t o hol d t hat unl ess t he appoi nt ment i s i n t er ms of t he r el evant r ul es and af t er a pr oper compet i t i on among qual i f i ed per sons, t he same woul d not conf er any r i ght on t he appoi nt ee. I f i t i s a cont r act ual appoi nt ment , t he appoi nt ment comes t o an end at t he end of t he cont r act , i f i t wer e an engagement or appoi nt ment on dai l y wages or casual basi s, t he same woul d come t o an end when i t i s di scont i nued. Si mi l ar l y, a t empor ar y empl oyee coul d not cl ai m t o be made per manent on t he expi r y of hi s t er m of appoi nt ment . I t has al so t o be cl ar i f i ed t hat mer el y because a t empor ar y empl oyee or a casual wage wor ker i s cont i nued f or a t i me beyond t he t er m of hi s appoi nt ment , he woul d not be ent i t l ed t o be absor bed i n r egul ar ser vi ce or made per manent , mer el y on t he st r engt h of such cont i nuance, i f t he or i gi nal appoi nt ment was not made by f ol l owi ng a due pr ocess of sel ect i on as envi saged by t he r el evant r ul es. I t i s not open t o t he cour t t o pr event r egul ar r ecr ui t ment at t he i nst ance of t empor ar y empl oyees whose per i od of empl oyment has come t o an end or of ad hoc empl oyees who by t he ver y nat ur e of t hei r appoi nt ment , do not acqui r e any r i ght . Hi gh Cour t s act i ng under Ar t i cl e 226 of t he Const i t ut i on of I ndi a, shoul d not or di nar i l y i ssue di r ect i ons f or absor pt i on, r egul ar i zat i on, or per manent cont i nuance unl ess t he r ecr ui t ment i t sel f was made r egul ar l y and i n t er ms of t he const i t ut i onal scheme. Mer el y because, an empl oyee had cont i nued under cover of an or der of Cour t , whi ch we have descr i bed as ' l i t i gi ous empl oyment ' i n t he ear l i er par t of t he j udgment , he woul d not be ent i t l ed t o any r i ght t o be absor bed or made per manent i n t he ser vi ce. I n f act , i n such cases, t he Hi gh Cour t may not be j ust i f i ed i n i ssui ng i nt er i m di r ect i ons, si nce, af t er al l , i f ul t i mat el y t he empl oyee appr oachi ng i t i s f ound ent i t l ed t o r el i ef , i t may be possi bl e f or i t t o moul d t he r el i ef i n such a manner t hat ul t i mat el y no pr ej udi ce wi l l be caused t o hi m, wher eas an i nt er i m di r ect i on t o cont i nue hi s empl oyment woul d hol d up t he r egul ar pr ocedur e f or sel ect i on or i mpose on t he St at e t he bur den of payi ng an empl oyee who i s r eal l y not r equi r ed. The
