JUDGMENT : 1. Since common question of facts and law is involved in all these writ petitions, therefore, they are being disposed of by this common order. 2. For brevity, the facts of S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1897/2023 [Teeja Meena & Ors. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors) are taken into consideration for disposal of the batch of writ petitions. 3. Briefly the facts of the case are that the petitioners being eligible for holding the post of Live Stock Assistant were engaged by the respondent-Department on urgent temporary basis in pursuance of the Notification issued on 20/09/2022. As per the terms and conditions of the Notification, the petitioners were appointed on a fixed remuneration of Rs.17,700/- per month and the period stipulated in the Notification was three months. After the expiry of three months, the engagement of the petitioners was discontinued. Aggrieved of this discontinuation of their engagement, the petitioners have preferred these writ petitions. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently submitted that although the appointments of the petitioners were on urgent temporary basis but the Department is still in need of personnel like the petitioners and, therefore, their services should not be discontinued. Shri Sharma further contended that on similar footing, certain Veterinary Officers were also engaged for the same period of three months, however, their engagement has been extended. Learned counsel further submits that on the RTI Applications preferred to the various Districts, the reply has been received by the petitioners that number of vacant posts of Live Stock Assistants are still available. Learned counsel submits that since the posts of Live Stock Assistants in the State of Rajasthan are still lying vacant, the engagement of the petitioners should be continued. Learned counsel, therefore, submits that the writ petitions may be allowed and the respondents may be directed to extend/re-engage the petitioners on the post of Live Stock Assistant. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the engagement of the petitioners was only for a specific period of three months to deal with the pandemic situation of Lumpy disease prevailing in the State of Rajasthan. Once the situation of Lumpy disease is controlled, the petitioners’ services are no longer required and they are being discontinued. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the engagement of the petitioners was only for a specific period of three months to deal with the pandemic situation of Lumpy disease prevailing in the State of Rajasthan. Once the situation of Lumpy disease is controlled, the petitioners’ services are no longer required and they are being discontinued. Learned counsel further submits that in pursuance of the Notification issued by the State Government on 11/03/2022 for appointment of Live Stock Assistant, the respondents have appointed 1177 Live Stock Assistants to be placed at the various Districts in the State of Rajasthan. He further submits that candidature of 259 Live Stock Assistants is pending consideration and the same will be appointed shortly. He submits that since the regularly selected candidates appointed on the post of Live Stock Assistant had been received by the Department, therefore, the services on urgent temporary basis are no longer required. Learned counsel further submits that the case of the Veterinary Officers stands on a different footing as the recruitment to the post of Veterinary Officers has not been completed and the State requires the services of such Officers and, therefore, their engagement has been continued. However, he fairly submits before this Court that after the selection of the regularly selected Live Stock Assistant, if the Department still requires the engagement of Live Stock Assistant in different Districts in the State of Rajasthan, the petitioners will be reengaged/extended. 6. Such submission made by learned Additional Advocate General is graciously accepted by learned counsel for the petitioners and he submits that if the vacancies still remain unfilled and the Department requires the services of Live Stock Assistant, then the cases of the petitioners shall be considered for re-engagement/extension. 7. I have considered the submissions made at the Bar and gone through the relevant record of the case as well as pleadings placed before me. 8. The admitted position in the present case that the petitioners were appointed on urgent temporary basis is clearly borne out from the record and the petitioners are entitled only for the remuneration which has been projected in their engagement letter and they cannot ask as a matter of right the continuation of the same after the period of their engagement is over. It is settled proposition of law that if the selected persons have joined in the Department, the services of the persons like the petitioners who are engaged on urgent temporary basis are required to be discontinued. There is no quarrel on the legal position that the petitioners cannot continue or cannot ask for re-engagement and continuation of urgent temporary basis engagement as a matter of right. 9. The case of the present petitioners is also distinguishable from the case of the Veterinary Officers as the requirement of the State has to be considered by the Competent Authorities of the Department. Whether the services of persons like the petitioner is required by the State or not is totally within the domain of the officials of the State Government. Thus, the case of the petitioners is distinguishable from the Veterinary Officers. 10. The last submission of learned Additional Advocate General that after exhausting the vacancies filled in by the regularly recruited persons, if still department is desirous of having the services of the persons like the petitioners, they will re-engage them appears to be reasonable, just and proper. Therefore, the petitioners has got no right to continue on the post of Urgent Temporary Basis and if the vacancies still remain unfilled after the regularly recruited Live Stock Assistant joined the department and the Department is desirous of engaging the persons like the petitioners for their functional need in the State of Rajasthan, the case of the petitioners will be considered by the State in accordance with law. 11. The writ petitions are disposed of in the above terms. 12. The stay applications and other pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of