M. F. SALDANHA, J. ( 1 ) HEARD counsel on both sides. These three writ petitions raise a common point namely the issue as to whether in the case of anemployee whose services with the respondent-corporation havecome to a premature end by virtue of a health or accidentald is ability they would be entitled to claim compassion ateemployment for some other eligible member of the family. Thedates in question are not of much consequence but the commonfactor in all these three writ petitions is the fact that pursuant toa health situation having arisen whereby on examination, it wasfound that the respective petitioners were not in a position toshape of affidavit or otherwise. The principle laid down by the Supreme Court is wellsettled. By the dates of the disposal of thewr it petitions out of which these appeals arose, the select listwas not finalised. It was only there after that the select list wasfinalised and it was necessary for the respondent to place therelevant factors connected with the final select list. Therespondent was permitted to place all the relevant material onrecord. The appointment orders of the appellants make it clearthat their appointment were on temporary basis up to the periodmentioned in the respective orders. It was made clear that theemployment was purely on temporary basis and that theappointee will be deemed to have been relieved on the expirydate mentioned in the order. It was also made clear that thetemporary engagement does not confer any right to continue inservice of the corporation and the preferential claim to anyfuture appointment. From a perusal of the merit list it isrevealed that the merit list is prepared in conformity with theroster and none of the appellants excepting a few personsmentioned (supra) stood higher in merit to any one of theregular appointees and could not claim to be absorbed in theposts in which they were appointed. 22. The first direction of the learned single judge to therespondent-corporation to announce the results of selectionsmade pursuant to the advertisement has already been compliedwith by the respondent and the select list is produced before us. the appointments were made in accordance with the select listand none of the appellants except the appellants mentioned (supra) ranked higher than the persons appointed. Some of theappellants who were appointed on temporary basis after beingsponsored by the smployment exchange were replaced bypersons who were regularly appointed after selection in otherdivisions by transfer. the appointments were made in accordance with the select listand none of the appellants except the appellants mentioned (supra) ranked higher than the persons appointed. Some of theappellants who were appointed on temporary basis after beingsponsored by the smployment exchange were replaced bypersons who were regularly appointed after selection in otherdivisions by transfer. In that view of the matter, the seconddirection given by the learned single judge does not survive. The3rd direction to give due weightage to the appellants who hadbeen selected but not appointed for various reasons also will notsurvive, in view of the appellants not finding a place in the selectlist in accordance with merit. The learned counsel for theappellants submitted that in view of the fact that the appellantshave worked in the respondent-corporation for sometime andsome of the appellants are still continued pursuant to theinterim direction of this court, the respondent should bedirected to regularise their services. It is apposite to set out theobservations of the Supreme Court in state of haryana andothers v piara singh and others, which reads as under: "23. Xxx xxx xxxthe High Court Acted rather hastily in directingwholesome regularisation of all such persons who have putin one year's service, and that too unconditionally. We mayventure to point out the several problems that will arise ifsuch directions become the norm: (a) take a case where certain vacancies are existingor expected and steps are taken for regular recruitmenteither through public service commission orother such body, as the case may be. A large number ofpersons apply. Inevitably there is bound to be somedelay in finalising the selections and making theappointments. Very often the process of selection isstayed or has to be re-done for one or the otherreasons. Meanwhile the exigencies of administrationmay require appointment of temporary hands. It mayhappen that these temporary hands are continued formore than one year because the regular selection hasnot yet been finalised. Now according to the impugneddirection the temporary hands completing one year'sservice will have to be regularised in those posts whichmeans frustrating the regular selection. There wouldbe no post left for regularly selected persons even ifthey are selected. Such cases have indeed come to thiscourt from these very two states. (b) xxx xxx xxx. (c) xxx xxx xxx. (d) such directions have also the effect of disregardingand violating the Rule relating to reservation in favour of backward class of citizens made under article 16 (4 ). Such cases have indeed come to thiscourt from these very two states. (b) xxx xxx xxx. (c) xxx xxx xxx. (d) such directions have also the effect of disregardingand violating the Rule relating to reservation in favour of backward class of citizens made under article 16 (4 ). What cannot be done directly cannot be allowed to be done in such indirect manner". in view of the submission of the learned standing counsel for the respondent that there are no vacancies and that there is no need. To fill up any further vacancies, the contention of the learned counsel for the appellants cannot be acceded to. All that we will say is that temporary employees cannot be replaced by making temporary appointments. If such a situation arises, the respondent will consider the case of the appellants for appointment. 23. For the aforesaid reasons, writ appeal No. 1708 of 1993 of devendrappa (petitioner in W. P. No. 32902 of 1992) is allowed and the respondent-corporation is directed to consider his case based on merit in the select list and appoint him on regular basis with effect from the date on which he was first appointed, within three months from the date of receipt of this order. 24. Writ appeal No. 1720 of 1993, G. Srinivasa (petitioner in W. P. No. 32914 of 1992) is disposed with a direction to respondent-corporation to consider his case by verifying the claim made by him within 3 months from the date of receipt of this order. Rest of the appeals are dismissed. No order as to costs. ( 2 ) FOR the aforesaid reasons, writ appeal No. 1708 of 1993 of devendrappa (petitioner in W. P. No. 32902 of 1992) is allowed and the respondent-corporation is directed to consider his case based on merit in the select list and appoint him on regular basis with effect from the date on which he was first appointed, within three months from the date of receipt of this order. 24. Writ appeal No. 1720 of 1993, G. Srinivasa (petitioner in W. P. No. 32914 of 1992) is disposed with a direction to respondent-corporation to consider his case by verifying the claim made by him within 3 months from the date of receipt of this order. Rest of the appeals are dismissed. No order as to costs. --- *** --- .