Judgment R. S. MADAN, J. 1. By this order we propose to dispose of civil Writ Petition No.19110/2005, Civil Writ petition No.19618/2005, Civil Writ Petition no.20068/2005 and C. W. P. No.4060/2007, which involved identical questions of law and facts. 2. The facts are being taken from the Civil writ Petition No.19110/2005. 3. Pursuant to the advertisement issued by the Statet. B. Control Society Haryana on June 25,2004, applications were invited for 23 posts of Laboratory Technicians and all the petitioners had applied for the said posts and they were interviewed by duly constituted selection Committee. On November 23, 2004, the petitioners were offered appointment on contract basis for one year. In pursuance of the said offers, the petitioners had joined on december 1, 2004, December 14, 2004, november 30, 2004, December 7, 2004, december 3, 2004 and December 7, 2004 respectively. 4. It is further the case of the petitioners that the petitioners were appointed on contract basis and their work and conduct was found satisfactory, so in these circumstances there is no justification for not allowing them to continue till regular appointments are made or till the project continues and further to replace the contract employees by another set of contract employees. 5. The petitioners have placed on record appointment letter (Annexure PI), which contained the following terms and conditions: "7. Your appointment is on contractual basis and your services can be terminated on 24 hours notice without assigning any reason. In case of winding up the project your services will automatically stand terminated.2. You will be required to submit declaration duly attested by a Gazetted Officer or a magistrate 1st Class to the effect that: (a) You are not married to a person already having a living wife/husband. (b) You are not on any previous occasion dismissed from service under any government Department or convicted by any Court of law. (c) You will submit a Medical fitness certificate issued by any Civil Surgeon of the State.3. You must understand that if any information/declaration furnished by you in connection with this appointment is at any time found to be false or incorrect, you will be liable to be dismissed from service.4. You will not be entitled to any travelling allowance for the journey performed by you for joining this appointment or on its termination.5. You must understand that if any information/declaration furnished by you in connection with this appointment is at any time found to be false or incorrect, you will be liable to be dismissed from service.4. You will not be entitled to any travelling allowance for the journey performed by you for joining this appointment or on its termination.5. You will not claim to be adjusted against any other post on the basis of your services of this post.6. You will be required to sign a contract form at District T. B. Centre Rohtak as per goi guidelines.7. In case you want to leave the job, you have to give one month advance notice to STCS or to deposit one month salary to the STCS.8. If the above conditions are acceptable to you, you should report to the District TB officer, Rohtak within 15 days from the issue of this appointment letter, failing which the offer will stand cancelled. " 6. Upon notice, the respondents filed written statement and resisted the claim of the petitioners. It was projected by way of preliminary objections that: "to ensure the effectiveness of function including planning, up gradation, execution, monitoring and supervision of the district activities, the Society had to engage the service of certain employees on contractual basis and for a fixed tenure and also on deputation from the other department of the state. The engagement of contractual employee on the post of Laboratory technician (LT) is contemplated by, provision 9.7 (G) (4) of RNTCP Modules under the heading Hiring of Contractual staff and also mentioned in the Clause 14.10 of the guidelines for the State Tuberculosis control Society under the heading "contractual Services" and in the guidelines it is specifically mentioned the norms to determine the strength of the contractual employees. As per the norms, the formulas is 5 per 2 million population for the calculation of number of post for the L. T. Accordingly, the posts were advertised by the answering-respondent on contract basis on consolidated salary of Rs.5,000 per month in various districts under this project as per the Government of India guidelines. The petitioners have no cause of action to file and maintain the present writ petition as they were appointed in a project in terms of letters of appointment Annexure P-1 on contractual basis for a period of 1 year on the fixed salary of Rs.5,000. The petitioners have no cause of action to file and maintain the present writ petition as they were appointed in a project in terms of letters of appointment Annexure P-1 on contractual basis for a period of 1 year on the fixed salary of Rs.5,000. The contractual period was also be terminable by giving a 24 hours notice contemplated under Clause I of the appointment letter. The terms and conditions contained in Annexure P-l was specifically accepted by the petitioners and tney continued in employment of the answering respondent specially and categorically on the basis of terms of appointment contained in the letter annexure P-1. It is pertinent to mention here that the petitioners also signed a contract form at district TB center as per the format prescribed in the government of India guidelines. " 7. During the pendency of the petition, an application has also been moved on behalf of the private respondents to implead them as party because they have filed a separate writ petition through which they have challenged the appointment of the petitioners. The said writ petition No.1216/2004 was disposed of vide order dated November 21, 2005. 8. It is submitted by the learned counsel for respondents that the petitioners accepted the offer of appointment and it was clearly stipulated that contract is for one year on the fixed salary of Rs.5,000 per month. Having accepted the aforesaid condition, the petitioners cannot be permitted to claim that they are entitled to continue for an indefinite period. It is open for the Society to extend or not to extend the period of contract. Each petitioners performance has to be judged by the Society to decide as to whether he is entitled to extension on the post or not. It was due to this reason that the contract for the post was offered on year to year basis 9. With this stand of the State government, the respondents prayed for dismissal of the petition. 10. It is pertinent to mention here that during the pendency of this petition, another civil Writ Petition No.4060/2007 titled as subhash Chander and Others V/s. State of haryana and Others was filed in which the claim of the petitioners is that they were appointed to the posts of senior Treatment supervisor and senior T. B. Lab Supervisor on the fixed consolidated salary of Rs.6,000 per month on contract basis. 11. 11. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 12. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that it is not disputed that the petitioners have been appointed on contractual basis for a period of one year and that their periods have been further extended by the respondent on the same terms and conditions. It is apprehended that the services of the petitioners may not be terminated before the regular persons are appointed. 13. In support of his arguments, he has relied upon the judgment of Sangeetasharmav. Union Territory of Chandigarh and Others 2005 Lab IC 105 where the Division Bench observed as under: "respondents cannot be permitted to substitute one set of persons by another set of persons, on contractual basis alone, by terming the said appointments as "guest facility appointments "the respondents directed to continue the contract employee till such time, persons selected on regular basis join-in a situation where a decision has been taken not a fill up for the vacancies on regular basis, it would be open for the administration not to continue the contractual employees any further. " 14. Reliance was also placed on the judgment of Surinder Kumar and Others V/s. State ofharyana and Others 2002 (3) RSJ 499 where the Division Bench has observed as under: "contractual appointment-petitioners were appointed through proper channel of appointment though en contractual basis clause (1) of the letter of appointment providing that the contract is valid upto 89 days only or till the joining of a regular recommendee of Haryana Staff Selection commission whichever is earlier - clause (2) providing that the services of the petitioners can be terminated at any time without notice - Held that the clause (2), on the fact of it, is arbitrary and offends the constitutional protection available to a person-State would suffer no prejudice if the petitioners are permitted to continue to work in terms of the letter of appointment with the clause of termination being deleted therefrom till regular incumbents join in accordance with rules -The petitioners held entitled to get minimum 01 the pay scale within clearness allowance. " 15. The observations made in both the authorities are not disputed. At the same time, it is not mandatory for the respondent to extend the period of contract of employment for an indefinite period. " 15. The observations made in both the authorities are not disputed. At the same time, it is not mandatory for the respondent to extend the period of contract of employment for an indefinite period. If a contract has been entered into between the parties, the parties are bound by its terms. The respondent is a Society which has to complete the project of control of tuberculosis cases by 2010. The primary function of the Society is to supervise programme, implement and monitor all the tuberculosis control activities in the State of haryana and to ensure that the programme does not deviate from the Government of Indias technical and Operation Guidelines of RNTCP and other policy decision. 16. In Gautam Khanna V/s. Union of India and Others 2004 (4) RSJ 402 the Division bench of this Court observed that the petitioners accepted the appointment under the provisions for which there is clear sanction for making the contractual appointment under the rules and further having accepted the aforesaid conditions, the petitioner cannot be permitted to claim that he is entitled to be appointed on the post for an indefinite period. "contractual Post" means the post carrying definite rate of pay and sanction without 1 imit of time but against which appointments are made for a limited period of time, which shall be renewable ana carry all the benefits of permanency except of the consequences of being on contract. 17. The petitioners accepted the appointment for the contractual post on contract basis for a period of one year. However, the period was extended two times by mutual agreement on the same terms and conditions. This will not give the petitioners a right of permanency for all times to come. It is a case where the appointments are being made by a Society to control the cases of Tuberculosis in the State of Haryana within a period upto 2010. It is open for the respondent-Society to extend or not to extend the period of contract. In the present case, no person is to be appointed on regular basis against these posts because it is a project which is to be completed by 2010. The aforesaid Authority does not confer upon the contract employee a right of permanency to continue on the post. It is the performance of the employee which has to be judged by the respondent-Society. The aforesaid Authority does not confer upon the contract employee a right of permanency to continue on the post. It is the performance of the employee which has to be judged by the respondent-Society. The observations made in surinder Kumars (supra) is, therefore, not attracted to the facts of the present case. 18. In Sangita Sharmas (supra), if the observation is taken to be the guidelines, which may create hurdles for the Society to complete the project within the time-bound period. It will always be an endeavour for the Society to eradicate the Tuberculosis from the State of haryana by 2010. The Society which deals with the health of the people should be given free hand to deal with its employees within the parameter of the Rules. The apprehension of the petitioners is that they are being replaced by fresh appointments on contract basis did not find support from any documents. 19. On our asking as to when services of the petitioners have been terminated, Mr. R. K. Malik has only submitted that the petitioners apprehend that their period of contract may not be extended for a further period of one year. This apprehension cannot be taken to be a decision of the respondent-Society. Some discretion has to be given to the Society in such like cases to complete the health project in a time-bound period. 20. In the result, we find no merit in these petitions hence, they are dismissed.