Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:24259 Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4534 of 2025 Petitioner :- Sandhya Alok Saxena Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Secondary Edu. Lko. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Arun Kumar Shukla,Anand Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Sri Arun Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Pankaj Patel, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for opposite parties No. 1 & 2. 2. In view of the proposed order, notice to opposite parties No. 3 to 6 is hereby dispensed with. 3. At the very outset, Sri Pankaj Patel has stated that the educational institution in question i.e. Police Modern School is affiliated to Central Board of Secondary Education, New Delhi which should be impleaded as necessary party. 4. On that learned counsel for the petitioner has requested that he may be permitted to implead Central Board of Secondary Education, Headquarter, New Delhi through its Secretary in the array of opposite parties as opposite party No.7 and copy may be provided to Sri Pankaj Patel. 5. The aforesaid request is accepted. 6. Let the Central Board of Secondary Education, Headquarter, New Delhi through Secretary be impleaded as opposite party No.7 in the array of opposite parties during the course of the day and copy may be given to Sri Pankaj Patel. 7. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the impugned order dated 31.03.2025 passed by officiating Principal of Police Modern School denying the renewal of contractual appointment of the petitioner for the Educational Session 2025-26 for the reason that the petitioner has attained the age of superannuation. 8. Sri Shukla has stated that the petitioner has still not attained the age of superannuation and and this fact has been formally indicated in the impugned order. 9. On being asked from Sri Shukla as to what is the right of the petitioner for seeking renewal of her contractual appointment, Sri Shukla has stated that the since the fact has wrongly been indicated in the impugned order to the effect that the petitioner has attained the age of superannuation therefore that order is unwarranted. 10. Be that as it may, the factual dispute in respect of the age of petitioner may not be adjudicated in the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The claim of renewal of contractual appointment may also not be adjudicated under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, without entering into the merit of the issue and without interfering in the impugned order dated 31.03.2025, the liberty is given to the petitioner to approach the opposite party No.3 i.e. Secretary- cum-Manager, Police Modern School, Committee of Management, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow preferring her fresh representation taking all pleas and grounds which are available with her enclosing therewith the copy of her earlier representation, if any, which are necessary for disposal of the representation within a period of fifteen days from today and if such representation is preferred by the petitioner within the aforesaid stipulated time, the authority concerned shall consider and dispose of the same strictly, by speaking and reasoned order in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, if it is so required, with expedition preferably, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and the decision thereof shall be intimated to the petitioner forthwith. 11. This writ petition is disposed of, in view of the aforesaid terms. Order Date :- 29.4.2025 Reena/- (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench