ORDER : 1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, claiming the following relief: “declaring the highhanded action on the part of the respondents 5 to 110 in attempting to discontinue or disrupt the services of the petitioners i.e. PGTs teaching Telugu and English contrary to the object in establishing the Kasturiba Gandhi Balika Vidyala during the intervening night of 11thand 12th June 2023 on the basis of oral instructions of the said respondents as illegal arbitrary unceremonious unfair contrary to the procedure established under law violation of principles of natural Justice Opposing the terms and conditions enumerated in the Contract of Employment entered in between Petitioners and their respective Schools Project Officers/respondents violation of Articles 14 191g 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents 5 to 110 to absorb the petitioners services into the regular basis at the place of Schools where they all are engaged and working for all these years by providing all the service benefits thereof coupled with payment of salaries regularly to all the petitioners”. 2. The facts of the case in brief are that: 3. The Kasturiba Gandhi Balika Vidyalas (KGBV) were initially established as part of a government scheme in August 2004. The object of these Vidyalayas was to create residential schools at the upper primary level, primarily for catering educational needs to girls from marginalized communities, including SC, ST, OBC, and Minorities, across various regions. Subsequently, the scope of KGBV was extended to the intermediate level. Funding for KGBVs was provided jointly by both the State and Central Governments. Later, a separate initiative called Sarvasiksha Abhyan (SSA) was launched, beginning on 01.04.2007. This led to the merger of KGBVs into the SSA program, making KGBV a component of SSA. 4. In a significant development, the State Government issued G.O.Ms.No.37 School Education (Prog.II) Department dated 04.06.2019, upgrading 140 KGBVs from the upper primary level to junior colleges, starting with the intermediate course. With the expansion of classes upto the intermediate level, additional teaching staff was required. Consequently, the authorities initiated the recruitment process of Part- Time Post Graduate Teachers (PGTs) for these newly elevated junior colleges for the academic year 2019 to 2020. With the expansion of classes upto the intermediate level, additional teaching staff was required. Consequently, the authorities initiated the recruitment process of Part- Time Post Graduate Teachers (PGTs) for these newly elevated junior colleges for the academic year 2019 to 2020. The petitioners in this case were selected as PGTs, having possessed the qualifications such as M.A. in Telugu, B.Ed, M.A. in English, B.Ed, and Telugu Pandit Training in both English and Telugu languages, in accordance with the notification issued by the State Project Director during the period 2018-2019. These petitioners were entrusted with the responsibility of teaching language subjects to intermediate students within the stipulated daily hours. The guidelines for the selection of Part-Time PGTs, including the mode of selection and required qualifications, were clearly outlined in the recruitment process. As of 2018-2019 to 2020-2023, a total of 352 KGBV junior colleges were established, and 1400 Part-Time PGTs were engaged, with a honorarium of Rs.12,000/- per month. 5. Each year, the petitioners' services were renewed through written Employment contracts that specified various conditions and obligations, including provisions for rescission and termination of their services. Appointment orders were issued to all of them, outlining the terms and conditions of their service. On 01.05.2023, the petitioner’s services were renewed for another one year period, following the pattern of previous employment agreements. As a result, the petitioners had a reasonable expectation that their services would continue without disruption for the usual one-year period. 6. However, on 27.05.2023, after the renewal of the petitioners' services, the respondents issued a notification for the recruitment of female candidates to fill-up 1358 vacant teaching positions, including PGTs. Among the vacancies, 846 were designated for PGTs. Notably, no new vacancies were announced for PGTs in Telugu language, giving the impression that the existing PGTs would continue in their roles, especially since the services of the petitioners had already been renewed. Some of the petitioners also applied for other positions such as Principals and CRTs to enhance their career prospects and earnings. The petitioners had underwent the selection process successfully and were indeed retained as PGTs for Telugu and English languages. 7. Surprisingly, on the night of 11.06.2023/12.06.2023, the respondents issued instructions discontinuing the services of the petitioners. The abrupt termination of their services without adhering to the terms and conditions of the agreement is challenged in the present writ petition. 8. The petitioners had underwent the selection process successfully and were indeed retained as PGTs for Telugu and English languages. 7. Surprisingly, on the night of 11.06.2023/12.06.2023, the respondents issued instructions discontinuing the services of the petitioners. The abrupt termination of their services without adhering to the terms and conditions of the agreement is challenged in the present writ petition. 8. Respondent No.3 – Commissioner of Intermediate Education filed counter affidavit stating that the Notification was issued by Respondent No.4 – Director of School Education and Respondent No.5 – State Project Director, Sarva Sikshya Abhyan. He submits that, Sarva Siksha Abhiyan is under the control of School Education for the purpose of recruiting PGTs in the year 2018 & 2019, as such he has no role and obligations in this matter. He further submits that, the petitioners were selected by Respondent Nos.4 & 5 and he has no role and he is no way concerned with the prayer made by the petitioners herein and requested to dismiss the writ petition against him. 9. Respondent No.5 – State Project Director, Samagra Shiksha, Patamata, Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh, filed counter affidavit, denying material allegations, inter alia, contending in Paragraph No.12 that, the petitioners were engaged as Guest Faculty only for the academic year 2022- 2023 with a condition that till the said vacancies are filled-up with full time teachers as per norms or till the end of the academic year 2022-23 whichever is earlier. Accordingly, vide proceedings dated 29.03.2023, the services of the Guest Faculty were withdrawn at the end of the academic year 2022-2023 i.e. on 29.03.2023.. When there is no provision for remuneration beyond the approved four posts by the Government of India, the post of PGT Telugu was not notified in the Notification. The petitioners are not allowed to misinterpret the notification by projecting before the Hon’ble High Court that as the said posts were not notified, they have a legitimate right to be continued is nothing but illusionary and against the policy decision of the Government. Hence, the claim of the petitioners to consider their candidature to continue them in the same places and by absorbing them does not arise. 10. It is also submitted in the counter affidavit that, all the petitioners are part time and guest faculty who are engaged purely on temporary/hourly basis for the period that particularly academic year only. Hence, the claim of the petitioners to consider their candidature to continue them in the same places and by absorbing them does not arise. 10. It is also submitted in the counter affidavit that, all the petitioners are part time and guest faculty who are engaged purely on temporary/hourly basis for the period that particularly academic year only. All the faculties including PGTs, CRTs, Guest PGTs and Guest CRTs were engaged purely on temporary basis for that particular academic year only. The petitioners having participated in the recruitment process, they cannot knock the doors of the Hon’ble Court alleging that the notification issued for recruitment is bias and untenable. 11. Finally, it is submitted in the counter affidavit that, in pursuance of the Notification dated 27.05.2023, the recruitment process has been completed and the selected candidates have joined in their respective selected places. In view of the above, this petitioner warrants no interference and requested to dismiss the writ petition. 12. Respondent No.5 also filed additional counter affidavit admitting that he has issued proceedings dated 29.04.2022 & 30.04.2022, withdrawing services of all the outsourced/contract employees. Later, on 01.02.2023, he had issued directions to re-engage the services of outsourced/contract employees. He submitted that all the approved project posts for the KGBV scheme are purely on contract and outsourcing basis and some of the agreements produced by the petitioners are not valid as they were not signed by the Principal, who is the competent authority to sign on the contractual agreements. 13. During hearing, Sri U.D.J. Bhima Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that, the termination of the petitioners' services was not in accordance with Condition Nos. 6 and 7 of the agreement. Condition No. 6 allows either party to rescind the contract by providing a 30-day written notice. However, in this case, no notice was issued to the petitioners, and their services were terminated abruptly and that if the respondents intend to terminate the services of the petitioners', they must be put on 30-day notice. Similarly, Clause 7 deals with the termination of candidature and also requires a 30-day prior notice for termination. In the present case, the respondents violated both Clauses 6 and 7 of the agreement, as well as the principles of natural justice and fairness, by terminating the petitioners' services without any prior notice or due process. Similarly, Clause 7 deals with the termination of candidature and also requires a 30-day prior notice for termination. In the present case, the respondents violated both Clauses 6 and 7 of the agreement, as well as the principles of natural justice and fairness, by terminating the petitioners' services without any prior notice or due process. Learned counsel for the petitioners also highlights that in a subsequent notification issued on 27.05.2023 for recruiting teaching faculty, the respondents did not include positions for Telugu subject faculty. This omission denied the petitioners the opportunity to be considered for recruitment to the position of Post Graduate Teachers in Telugu subject. 14. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, as a matter of fact, the appellants were duly qualified and were selected in accordance with due selection process and were required to undergo the selection process in every Academic Year. He submits that the modus operandi of the Colleges/Institutions was to engage the services of the appellants at the beginning of the Academic Session and to discontinue them at the end of the Academic Session; and again to issue fresh advertisements for the next Academic Session. In response to the same, the candidates were again required to follow the selection process to get appointed. It is therefore submitted that though there was sufficient workload for regular posts, the appellants were deprived of regular employment. It is submitted that, in any case, the appellants had not sought for regularization. The relief claimed was only for continuation of their services till duly selected candidates were appointed on regular basis. 15. In support of his contentions, learned counsel placed reliance on the judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Hargurpratap Singh vs. State of Punjab : (2007) 13 SCC 292 , Rattan Lal vs. State of Haryana : (1985) 4 SCC 43 , Manish Gupta vs. President, Jan Bhagidari Samiti : Civil Appeal Nos.3084-3088 of 2022 dated 21.04.2022, High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Y.N. Rao vs. State of Andhra Pradesh : 2022 SCC Online AP 2491 and High Court of Jammu & Kashmir in Murad Ali Sajan vs. UT of J. & K. : WP© No.2635 of 2022 dated 06.12.2022. On the strength of the principle laid down in the above judgments, learned counsel for the petitioners requested to grant the relief as prayed for. 16. On the strength of the principle laid down in the above judgments, learned counsel for the petitioners requested to grant the relief as prayed for. 16. Per contra, learned Government Pleader for School Education would contend that, the appointments of the petitioners were neither ad hoc nor temporary, but their services were as guest lecturers on contractual basis for 12 months. The requirement of the guest lecturers was from year to year on the basis of the number of students available for particular course(s). Further, the nature of the engagement of petitioners is purely contractual and once their contract has come to an end, they have no locus standi to challenge the action of the respondents. 17. He further asserts that the Project Approval Board, in its meeting on March 22, 2023, resolved to recruit full-time teaching faculty, including Full-Time Teachers/Lecturers, for each center. In accordance with the Board's resolution, the District Level Committees were granted the authority to carry out the recruitment as per the terms specified in the Board's resolution. He submits that the petitioners' services were discontinued for the academic year 2022-2023 through a notice issued by Respondent No. 5 on 29.03.2023. He argues that the nature of the petitioners' employment is that of temporary part-time teachers, and their contractual agreements were limited to one year. Consequently, their services were withdrawn by issuing proceedings on 29.03.2023, with a one-month notice period, and their employment was officially concluded on 28.04.2023. As a result, he contends that the assertion made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, suggesting a violation of Clauses 6 and 7 of the Agreements, cannot be substantiated in light of the proceedings dated 29.03.2023. 18. The Government Pleader argues that the non-notification of Telugu language teaching posts by Respondent No.6, as it can be fulfilled from both the subject faculty and contract residential teachers, does not violate any rules or principles of natural justice and reasonableness. It is pointed out that some of the petitioners applied for and participated in the new selection process following the notification dated 27.05.2023, with a few of them successfully securing positions. Therefore, having engaged in this new selection process, the petitioners cannot now challenge the actions of the respondents. It is pointed out that some of the petitioners applied for and participated in the new selection process following the notification dated 27.05.2023, with a few of them successfully securing positions. Therefore, having engaged in this new selection process, the petitioners cannot now challenge the actions of the respondents. Additionally, the Government Pleader contends that the petitioners received an honorarium in May 2023, and the Principals of the respective institutions entered into fresh one-year agreements with them, even though they lacked the authority to do so. Consequently, the petitioners cannot rely on these agreements. 19. In support of his contentions, learned Government Pleader placed reliance on the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India vs. S. Vinodh Kumar : (2007) 8 SCC 100 and Ramesh Chandra Shah vs. Anil Joshi : (2013) 11 SCC 309 and requested to dismiss the writ petition. 20. Heard Sri U.D.J. Bhima Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for School Education and perused the material available on record. 21. One of the contentions urged by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the respondents did not issue any notice as required under Clause Nos.6 & 7 of the Terms and Conditions of the Agreements between the petitioners and respondents. For better appreciation of the case, Clause Nos.6 & 7 of the Agreements are extracted hereunder: “6. Rescission Either party may rescind this contract at any time by giving the other party at least 30 days notice in writing of its intention to do so. However, Samagra Shiksha will suspend or dismiss the services of the Signatory immediately if involved in disciplinary/criminal cases and prima facie findings establish the irregularities. The State Project Director, Andhra Pradesh Samagra Shiksha, is empowered to take necessary appropriate action without giving any notice. 22. On reading of Clause No.6, the respondents only possessed their right to suspend or dismiss the services of the petitioners, if they are involved in disciplinary or criminal cases and only when prima facie irregularities are found or established against the petitioners. Only in this regard, they are empowered to take appropriate action without issuing any notice. But, in the present case, the petitioners were neither suspended nor dismissed from their services by the respondents, they simply ignored the services abruptly. Only in this regard, they are empowered to take appropriate action without issuing any notice. But, in the present case, the petitioners were neither suspended nor dismissed from their services by the respondents, they simply ignored the services abruptly. Moreover, it is not the case that the petitioners were involved in any offences or they have committed any irregularities. In the absence of any commission of offences or irregularities/mistakes by the petitioners, terminating the petitioners without any notice is a grave illegality committed by the respondents, as such the act of the respondents in violation of principles of natural justice, hence such action is illegal and arbitrary. 23. One of the contentions urged by the learned Government Pleader for School Education is that the petitioners have contravened Clause No.7 of the Terms and Conditions of the Agreement. Clause No.7 reads as follows: 7. Termination In case of improper conduct and/or unsatisfactory performance by the Signatory, having regard in particular to the Terms and Reference mentioned above. Samagra Shiksha shall terminate this Contract without any notice and no compensation shall be payable in such case.” 24. On bare reading of the above provision, apparently no improper conduct or unsatisfactory performance by the petitioners is exhibited by the petitioners. If the petitioners possessed any improper conduct or if the competent/concerned authority felt that the performance of the petitioners was not upto the mark or not satisfying, they ought to have issued Memo(s) bringing it to their notice, calling for explanation for such misdeeds or misconduct. But, no such misconduct or unsatisfactory performance was exhibited by the petitioners prima facie. In addition, the ‘Service Certificates’ produced by some of the petitioners, which were issued by the Principal, show that, the dedicated professional attitude during working years with nature and character as well. On this ground also, the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is upheld, while rejecting the contention canvassed by the learned Government Pleader for School Education. 25. When the respondents initially entered service agreements with the petitioners for the academic year 2023-2024, extending these agreements for one additional year, they also signed new agreements on 01.05.2023, authorized by the concerned Principal of the College/Institution, who had previously entered into agreements with the respondents. 25. When the respondents initially entered service agreements with the petitioners for the academic year 2023-2024, extending these agreements for one additional year, they also signed new agreements on 01.05.2023, authorized by the concerned Principal of the College/Institution, who had previously entered into agreements with the respondents. However, given that the respondents had already committed to service agreements for the academic year 2023-2024, their abrupt and unceremonious withdrawal of the petitioners' services, citing either the new recruitment outlined in the Notification dated 27.05.2023 or the Board Resolution that determined a new staffing pattern, which allowed only the subject teachers of the faculty to continue and excluded Telugu Language teachers, appears to be an act of discrimination against the petitioners, which is in violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. 26. The learned Government Pleader for School Education has contended that the proceedings issued on 29.03.2023, notifying the heads of institutions about the discontinuation of the petitioners' services from 28.04.2023, represent compliance with Clauses 6 and 7 of the Service Agreements. However, this contention cannot be accepted because the service agreements were renewed on 01.05.2023, extending them for an additional year, and in the absence of individual notices and its services to the petitioners herein. 27. The learned Government Pleader for School Education contends that the contract service agreements entered into by the respondents had already concluded with the Academic Year 2022-2023. Furthermore, they argue that the agreements submitted by the petitioners and entered into by the Principal of the concerned institution were unauthorized and should not be considered. However, this argument is untenable and unsustainable. In the past, the Principals were authorized to enter into service agreements, as exemplified by the action taken on 01.05.2023. Additionally, it's worth noting that specific notices were not issued to either the petitioners or the concerned institutions; instead, only common proceedings dated 29.03.2023 were issued and the same was kept for their records. 28. In the past, the Principals were authorized to enter into service agreements, as exemplified by the action taken on 01.05.2023. Additionally, it's worth noting that specific notices were not issued to either the petitioners or the concerned institutions; instead, only common proceedings dated 29.03.2023 were issued and the same was kept for their records. 28. The entire action of the respondents having entered into fresh agreements and having notified all the posts for fresh recruitment vide Notification dated 27.05.2023 and not notifying the posts of Telugu Language Teachers is also a discrimination on the part of the petitioners, for the reason that the said action of the respondents indicates discouragement of original language/Mother Tongue to the students, which is also against the National Education Policy, 2020 which has propounded that Primary Education to impart Mother Language in the State of Andhra Pradesh. 29. Numerous legendary personalities and legal luminaries have expressed their views on the issue of ‘Hindi’ as National Language and the vernacular or mother tongue is the best language to be used in the schools. The views of all of them are not possible to be inserted, but views of selective personalities are quoted for guidance. The views of the greatest legend of India Swami Vivekananda on mother tongue from the book “The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, 9 vols.”, the relevant portion of which is as under: “Though all natural languages are capable of expressing sublime thoughts, modern schools believe that the language one acquires as the mother tongue is the best medium for transmitting information, ideas, and knowledge. The concepts presented in the mother tongue are grasped much easier than any language that one learns later through formal instructions. The mother tongue is to the mind as blood is to the body. Therefore, teaching children in the mother tongue can produce better results. There is enough evidence to show that learning and language are closely related to each other. Every man is capable of receiving knowledge if it is imparted in his own language.” 30. The mother tongue is the best medium of transformation. The concept can easily be grasped in mother tongue, therefore, teaching children in mother tongue can produce better results. Learning and language are closely related, if knowledge is imparted in own language, a child is easily capable of receiving knowledge. The mother tongue is the best medium of transformation. The concept can easily be grasped in mother tongue, therefore, teaching children in mother tongue can produce better results. Learning and language are closely related, if knowledge is imparted in own language, a child is easily capable of receiving knowledge. It is expressed that the language accepted by all is the language that lives the longest. In the said context, the quote of Nelson Mandela is relevant. It is expressed by him, “If you talk to a man in a language he understands, that goes to his head and if you talk to him in his language that goes to his heart.” 31. In Dr. Srinivas Guntupalli vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Through its Principal Secretary, School Education Department, Guntur : Writ Petition (PIL) Nos. 183 & 185 of 2019 dated 15.04.2020, the Division Bench of this Court held as follows: 22. Mahatma Gandhi said that the English language has usurped the dearest place in our hearts. He likened the mother tongue alike to mother and observed, “We do not have that love for it, as we have for our mother”. In Young India 1921, Gandhiji said “I must cling to my mother tongue as to my mother’s breast, in spite of its shortcomings. It alone can give me the life-giving milk” (Harijan, 1946). Citing the example of Russia, which has achieved the scientific progress without the knowledge of English, Gandhiji reiterated, “It is the mindset that has created the gulf. It is our mental slavery that makes us feel that we cannot do without English. I can never subscribe to that defeatist creed.” In the speech delivered by Mahatma Gandhi on 20.10.1917 in Second Gujarat Educational Conference, he expressed “English cannot fulfil all criteria, but Hindi can”. In his article written in London in 1909 – Mother Tongue and National Language, he said that he considered it a matter of shame that those who know English boast of their proficiency in the language than in their own mother-tongue in favour of English. In his opinion, “Those who have to serve their country and do public work will have to find time for their mother tongue. In his opinion, “Those who have to serve their country and do public work will have to find time for their mother tongue. If English can only be learnt at the expense of the mother tongue, it would be in the interest of the country that one does not learn English at all.” Gandhiji in his book The Mind of Mahatma Gandhi said, “The baby takes its first lesson from its mother and I, therefore, regard it as a sin against the motherland to inflict upon her children a tongue other than their mother’s for their mental development”. 23. Rabindranath Tagore in his book Siksar Herpher (1299 B.S.) emphasized the need for a system of education conducted in congenial surroundings and in a manner surcharged with the spirit of joy. He argues that the ultimate aim of education should be the all-round development of an individual for harmonious adjustment to reality. It advocated the value and need of the mother tongue in providing all the necessary educational nourishment of the child. In his editorial column “Sadhana”, wrote that he was firm on his stand for the place of the mother tongue in education, but nevertheless he insisted that English may be taught as a language and that, from early years, in wise doses, and in the proper sequence, only as a supplement to the mother tongue. 24. In the view of Dr.Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, realising the aim of education is to bring nearer to God. In his aim, one should study the various aspects of education. Through education, he wants to establish a classless society in order to bring equality between man and man. He wants that education should develop universal brotherhood. The most important aim of education is to help us to see the other world, the invisible and intangible world beyond the space and time. Education has to give us a second birth to help us to realise what we have already in us. Education should enable one to imbibe attitude of simple living and high thinking. The true aim of education, according to the Indian sages, is second birth. We are born into the world of nature and necessity; we must be reborn into the world of spirit and freedom. In silence and meditation, we discover the spirit in us, learn truth and love, acquire grace and strength by which we can implement our ideas.” 32. The true aim of education, according to the Indian sages, is second birth. We are born into the world of nature and necessity; we must be reborn into the world of spirit and freedom. In silence and meditation, we discover the spirit in us, learn truth and love, acquire grace and strength by which we can implement our ideas.” 32. In Rattan Lal vs. State of Haryana (referred supra), the Hon’ble Apex while considering the State Government’s practice of appointing large number of teachers on ad hoc basis at the commencement of academic year, terminating their services before next summer vacation or earlier and reappointing them on ad hoc basis at the commencement of the next academic year, held that, ad hoc teachers are subject to unreasonable and arbitrary “hire and fire policy”. Such policy of ad hocism followed by the State Government for a long period resulted in breach of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. 33. In Manish Gupta vs. President, Jan Bhagidari Samiti (referred supra), the Hon’ble Apex Court while dealing with similar circumstance, directed the writ petitioners therein to continue to work on their respective posts till regular selections are made. 34. In Murad Ali Sajan vs. UT of J & K, the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir, while relying on the above judgments, held as follows: “19.In view of the clear dictum of law laid down by the Supreme Court in Manish Gupta's case (supra) by relying upon its earlier judgments in Ratan Lal and Ors v. State of Haryana and Hargurpratap Singh vs. State of Punjab & Ors, it was not open to the respondents to invite the applications from the candidates for filling up of posts of Staff Nurses on academic arrangement basis after disengaging the services of the petitioners, who were already working on a similar arrangement with the respondents. It may be correct to say that the petitioners are not entitled to seek extension of their contractual engagement but at the same time the respondents' action of replacing the academic WP(C) No.2635/2022 CM No.6660/2022 arrangement by another similar arrangement cannot be countenanced in law. The respondents can only replace the petitioners by filling up the vacant posts of Staff Nurses on substantive basis, which they have not chosen to do.” 35. The respondents can only replace the petitioners by filling up the vacant posts of Staff Nurses on substantive basis, which they have not chosen to do.” 35. Thus, in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court and other High Courts in the judgments referred supra, this Court is of the opinion that the respondents have terminated the services of the petitioner, illegally and arbitrarily. 36. The appointments of the petitioners were made after the candidates had gone through due selection procedure. Though the learned Government Pleader for School Education has strenuously urged that the appointments of the petitioners were as Part Time Post Graduate Teachers and not as ad hoc employees, from the nature of the notification dated 17.06.2019, it could clearly be seen that the appellants were appointed on ad hoc basis. It is a settled principle of law that an ad hoc employee cannot be replaced by another ad hoc employee and he can be replaced only by another candidate who is regularly appointed by following a regular procedure prescribed. 37. The central issue at hand in the current writ petition is whether the State Government can repeatedly hire teachers on an ad-hoc basis at the start of each academic year, terminating their services before the next academic year begins, and then renewing these appointments after a short break. This practice is particularly prevalent in filling long-standing vacancies that have remained unfilled for several years. It is the responsibility of the State Government to expedite the appointment of teachers to these vacancies in accordance with established regulations. The ad-hoc appointments are limited to a twelve-month period and are renewed after brief intervals. A significant number of teachers in Andhra Pradesh are hired in this manner, and they are unjustly deprived of entitlements, such as summer vacation benefits, along with their salary and allowances during that time, as well as other privileges like casual leave, medical leave, maternity leave, and more, which are typically provided to all government employees. This pernicious practice of ad-hoc appointments by the State Government leads to the unnecessary application of an arbitrary 'hiring and firing' policy, particularly affecting the bulk of educated unemployed individuals who reluctantly accept these ad-hoc positions under unfavorable working conditions. The government's seeming exploitation of this situation is not conducive to sound personnel management. This pernicious practice of ad-hoc appointments by the State Government leads to the unnecessary application of an arbitrary 'hiring and firing' policy, particularly affecting the bulk of educated unemployed individuals who reluctantly accept these ad-hoc positions under unfavorable working conditions. The government's seeming exploitation of this situation is not conducive to sound personnel management. Such a policy is likely to have detrimental effects on educational institutions and the students studying there. The prolonged adherence to this 'ad-hocism' policy by the State Government raises concerns about its compliance with the constitutional principles of Article 14 and Article 16. This situation cannot be allowed to persist any longer. It should be emphasized that the State Government is expected to serve as a role model employer in this regard. 38. Therefore, this Court directs the State Government to promptly initiate actions to fill the existing vacancies, in accordance with the relevant rules, in which individuals are currently serving on an ad-hoc basis. It is also ordered that all those currently holding these ad-hoc positions be permitted to continue in their roles until the vacancies are properly filled. Furthermore, teachers presently working in ad-hoc positions, provided they meet the required qualifications, are encouraged to apply for regular appointments in those positions. If any petitioner in these cases has, in accordance with existing rules, earned the right to be recognized as a regularly appointed teacher, the State Government shall review their case and issue an appropriate decision. 39. This Court expresses strong disapproval of the State Government's policy, which unjustly denies salary and allowances to 'ad-hoc' teachers during the summer vacation period by creating fictitious breaks, as described above. In light of this order, 'ad-hoc' teachers will receive their salary and allowances for the duration of the summer vacation for as long as they remain in their positions. Those who are entitled to maternity or medical leave shall also be granted such leave in accordance with the established regulations. 40. In the result, writ petition is allowed with the following directions: i. The action of the Respondent Nos.5 to 110 in attempting to discontinue or disrupt the services of the petitioners i.e. PGT Teaching Telugu & English is declared as illegal and arbitrary; ii. The respondents are directed to continue the services the petitioners in terms of the respective agreements. iii. The respondents are directed to continue the services the petitioners in terms of the respective agreements. iii. The respondents are directed to consider the entitlement of the petitioners even after completion of the agreement after academic year 2023-2024, as long as the said scheme is in existence. 41. Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending if any, shall also stand closed.