Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:842 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12690 of 2024 Petitioner :- Dipendra Raj Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Panchayati Raj Deptt. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Janendra Kumar Verma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dilip Kumar Pandey Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J. 1. Heard. 2. Under challenge is the resolution dated 04.10.2024, a copy of which is Annexure-1 to the petition, whereby the petitioner has been informed that his contractual service have come to an end on 30.11.2022. Also under challenge is the advertisement dated 07.06.2024, a copy of which is Annexure-2 to the petition. 3. Bereft of the unnecessary details the admitted facts of the case are that the petitioner had been appointed on contract basis as Panchayat Assistant, a copy of the contract is as Annexure-4 to the petition. 4. Perusal of the Clause 3 of the said contract would indicate that the petitioner had only been appointed up to 30.11.2022 and it was made clear that the said contractual service shall come to end automatically. 5. The petitioner claims that despite his contractual service having come to an end, he continued in service and was also allotted various work including election duty yet the honorarium for the aforesaid period i.e. since December, 2022 was not paid to him. 6. Once the services of the petitioner were contractual and automatically came to an end as specifically specified in the contract more particularly Clause 3 of the contract consequently merely because the petitioner continued to work in anticipation of his services either being continued or being extended cannot vest any right to him to seek honorarium for the period for which he has continued to work without contractual services having been extended. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on two orders that had been passed by this Court. 8. Needless to mention that the aforesaid orders, copies of which are Annexure-16 and 17 to the petition, would not come to the rescue of the petitioner inasmuch as this Court has not considered that the contractual services as in the instant case automatically came to an end at the end of the contract. 9. Considering the aforesaid, no case for interference is made out. The writ petition is dismissed. Order Date :- 7.1.2025 prateek Digitally signed by :- PRATEEK ARORA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench