With due respect to the Questioner, i think it is a very tricky question.First and foremost, the term "employment" has a definite and wider connotation apart from the mere engagement of one's services by the other for hire or reward. It creates a lasting relationship between the hirer and the hired.Depending upon the lasting effect of the relationship, the mutuality of obligations imposed on both, prevailing norms of social justice governing interpersonal relations between the haves and the have-nots, gradual but steady scientific advancement culminating in technological innovations and the consequential growth in commerce and trade compatible with changing consumption patterns all put together have effected considerable changes in the relationship between the hirer and the hired from "master-serf" to "master - servant" and finally to "employer - employee."Secondly, why the questioner is more concerned about the legal implications of the so-called "short-term or fixed-term" appointments. While interpreting the meaning of the term "retrenchment" u/s 2(oo) of the Industrial Disputes Act,1947 with specific reference to the newly added sub-clause (bb), the Punjab and Haryana High Court [ 1990(1)LLJ.443 ] observed:"In fact cl(bb), which is an exception, is to be so interpreted as to limit it to cases where the work itself has been accomplished and the agreement of hiring for a specific period was genuine.If the work continues, the non-renewal of the contract on the face of it has to be dubbed as mala fide. It would be fraud in law if it is interpreted otherwise."So, if such practice is adopted to circumvent the commom law principles of employer and employee in respect of the cadre of workmen, it would be void ab initio ;in other cases? --- please consider what AKIO MORITA says in "Made in Japan" : "Management must consider a good return for the investor, but he also has to consider his employees or his colleagues, who must help him to keep the company alive and he must reward their work. The investor and the employee are in the same position, but some times the employee is more important, because he will be there a long time whereas an investor will often get in and out on a whim in order to make a profit. The worker's mission is to contribute to the company's welfare, and his own, every day all of his working life. He is really needed.Basically, there has to be mutual respect and a sense that the company is the property of the employees and not of a few top people.But those people at the top of the company have a responsibility to lead that family faithfully and be concerned about the members."