Judgment Kurian Joseph, C.J. All the petitioners have the same grievance that respondents No. 1 to 5 have not followed the principle of ‘first come last go’ in awarding the work to the daily rated mazdoors. It is the allegation that juniors to them have been retained while they were dis-engaged. Still further it is pointed out that there is sufficient work available for engaging and regularizing the petitioners. 2. Respondents No. 1 to 5 have filed a detailed reply. The history of the daily rated mazdoors, casual workers, seasonal workers etc. has been given in detail. However, in the nature of the order, we propose to pass in this case, we do not think it necessary to refer to all those aspects. 3. It is the specific case of the petitioners that many of them also fulfilled the eligibility criteria for regularization in terms of the earlier policies and yet they have been ignored while juniors have been regularized. If that be the factual situation, the same requires verification and appropriate corrective steps. Therefore, there will be a direction to the petitioner concerned to furnish his service particulars by way of an appropriate representation before the second respondent within a period of one month from today, in which case, the matter will be duly examined and appropriate steps shall be taken by the second respondent. 4. Needless to say that in case such eligible petitioners have not been granted the benefits in terms of Annexures P-1 and P-2, policies, they will certainly be granted the eligible benefits. The needful action shall be taken within another three months. 5. It appears, respondents No.1 to 5 now propose to outsource their work as per the decision taken by the Board. Having regard to the service rendered by the petitioners and similarly situated, either seasonal or casual, we are of the view that it will only be in the interest of justice and fitness of things that the Board pursues their cases with whom they propose to out-source their work. There will be a direction to respondents No. 1 to 5 to explore the possibility of engaging the petitioners also through the agency to whom the work is to be out-sourced. 6. There will be a direction to respondents No. 1 to 5 to explore the possibility of engaging the petitioners also through the agency to whom the work is to be out-sourced. 6. In case the Board does not out-source their work, we make it clear that in preference to new recruits, the petitioners shall be engaged and continued as per their seniority, for casual or seasonal or such types of works. 7. The writ petitions are disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any.