JUDGMENT : Since all the writ applications have raised identical questions of law and fact with minor variation, on a mention being made by counsel representing the petitioners in the present writ applications, they have been listed and heard together. 2. The common thread of grievance which runs through all these writ applications is that the respondent authorities, who are functionaries of the Ex-Servicemen Contributory Health Scheme (ECHS) have arbitrarily brought to an end the engagement of these petitioners even before the period of contract expired. The engagements are on the post of Dental Officers, Physiotherapist, Drivers, Lab Technicians, Lab Attendant etc. 3. One thing, however, is not and cannot be a matter of dispute that all the engagements have been made on contract for a fixed period of one year, may be extendable by another year. It is the decision of the respondents to disengage the petitioners and engage some other persons on contract, which led to filing of the writ applications and challenging the orders/ notices for disengagement. 4. Learned counsels representing the petitioners argue in unison that one set of contractual appointees cannot be substituted by another set of contractual appointees. There is nothing to indicate that their service was not satisfactory during the period contract subsisted and, therefore, the respondent authorities only to accommodate certain set of people for other reasons have engaged other persons at the cost of these petitioners. 5. Learned Additional Solicitor General representing Union of India defends the decision and has filed detailed counter affidavit in the cases. However, for the purposes of convenience, the counter affidavit, which has been filed in the case of Chandan Kumar Thakur (CWJC No.15849 of 2015), has been referred to. In the said counter affidavit, the scheme known as Ex-Servicemen Contributory Health Scheme formulated by Union of India has been brought on record. The object and purpose for framing such Contributory Health Scheme is to provide medical facilities to the ex-servicemen, who are spread across the country and need priority medical attention after their disengagement from the Forces. It is a rather detailed scheme, which is Annexure- A to the counter affidavit and Annexure- B is the procedure laid down by the Government of India, Ministry of Defence for the contractual employment of the staff to be engaged for the ECHS Poly Clinics. 6. It is a rather detailed scheme, which is Annexure- A to the counter affidavit and Annexure- B is the procedure laid down by the Government of India, Ministry of Defence for the contractual employment of the staff to be engaged for the ECHS Poly Clinics. 6. One thing is evident from reading of the scheme as well as the agreement entered between the petitioners and the respondent Union of India that these engagements are on contract for a fixed period and the outer limit contemplated in the scheme for such engagement is two years. It also envisages a fixed remuneration for the people, who are engaged on contract and it talks in terms of disengagement prior to expiry of the contract. 7. Another aspect of significance, which has been pointed out by the learned Additional Solicitor General, is that most of these engagements are required to be confined to the exservicemen. However, certain leeway has been given for engaging civilians in absence of availability of ex-servicemen but to ensure the objective of such engagements a churning process keeps going on every year. The exercise for such selection and identification of hands on different posts under the scheme is carried out year to year after due advertisement issued in the newspapers. 8. Even in the present case an advertisement was issued. All these petitioners responded to the advertisement. They participated but since the respondent authorities found better or more suitable ex-servicemen, who were required to be engaged on contract on similar terms and conditions as the present petitioners, the petitioners were given notice of disengagement. When the engagement letters have been issued after due process of selection, petitioners have rushed to the Court. 9. Looking at the nature of the engagement and the scheme, these are not engagements, which are being made on any permanent or substantive basis but are made with a particular object, which is required to be achieved. Petitioners cannot use this engagement as an opportunity to hang on to the posts on one pretext or other. The terms and conditions of such contract were widely known to such persons and if there is a breach of the contract as is being urged at the bar, they have remedy under common law and not in a writ application. All the writ applications are dismissed being devoid of merit. The terms and conditions of such contract were widely known to such persons and if there is a breach of the contract as is being urged at the bar, they have remedy under common law and not in a writ application. All the writ applications are dismissed being devoid of merit. The interim order, if any, will be vacated since the Court does not find any infirmity with the decisions under challenge.