Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:39854 Court No. - 18 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6870 of 2025 Petitioner :- Shabana Israil Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Bal Vikas Seva Evam Pushtahar Lko. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Qazi Mohd.Ahmad Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned State Counsel for opposite parties. 2. Petition has been filed challenging order dated 17.05.2025 whereby petitioner currently employed as a contractual Mukhya Sevika has been transferred from Utraula to Tulsipur in District Balrampur. 3. It has been submitted that petitioner being a contractual employee could not have been transferred by means of impugned order which even otherwise is against directions issued by State Government dated 17.08.2011 as well as against the initial order dated 30.07.2003 whereby petitioner was engaged in service. It is further submitted that a contractual employee by its very nature having been employed to fill up a particular post, cannot be directed to be transferred to fill up another vacancy. 4. In pursuance of directions issued earlier, learned State counsel has been provided written instructions dated 02.07.2025 which is taken on record and as per which petitioner was initially employed on contractual basis in the year 2003 and has continued as such in the same capacity. 5. It has been submitted by learned State Counsel that as per the terms of engagement, there is no prohibition in petitioner being transferred. Learned State counsel also submits that as per representation made by petitioner against the impugned order on 24.05.2025, the contractual services of petitioner have probably ended in June, 2025. 6. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and perusal of material on record, it is evident and admitted that petitioner was initially engaged on contractual basis on the said post in the year 2003 and has continued as such till passing of impugned order. The terms and conditions of engagement as indicated in the initial engagement letter dated 30.07.2003 clearly indicates that there is a complete prohibition with regard to any request being made for transfer and in fact such a request would deem the applicant ineligible for engagement in service. 7. As a natural corollary, it would be evident that transfer of such contractual employee is prohibited in terms of contract of engagement. Although not specifically indicated, such a prohibition can clearly be inferred from the letter dated 30.07.2003. 8. The aforesaid aspect has further been clarified by State Government vide letter dated 17.08.2011 clearly prohibiting transfer of contractual employee engaged in the women and child development scheme. 9. In view of admitted situation that petitioner is a contractual employee and particularly in view of terms of engagement as well as letter dated 17.08.2011, the impugned order dated 17.05.2025 being unsustainable is hereby quashed by issuance of a writ in nature of Certiorari. Consequently petitioner would continue at her place of posting as prior to impugned order with same benefits. Benefit to petitioner due to quashing of impugned order would ensue only in case her services as a contractual employee still subsists. 10. Consequently, petition succeeds and is allowed. Order Date :- 11.7.2025 Subodh/- Digitally signed by :- SUBODH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- SUBODH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench