Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:59444-DB Court No. - 29 Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 187 of 2025 Appellant :- Vikky Kumar Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Siddharth Khare Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rafat Raza Khan Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J. Hon'ble Praveen Kumar Giri,J. 1. Admitted facts as are apparent on record are that the appellant/writ petitioner was engaged on contractual basis as a Safai Karamchari in Nagar Panchayat - Bhojpur, District - Moradabad. His engagement continued from time to time. Ultimately, his services were discontinued on the ground of unauthorised absence for long. According to the respondents, the petitioner absented from work without informing the employer, as a result of which the area assigned to the appellant could not be cleaned causing inconvenience to members of public, as a result of which his engagement was discontinued. The order impugned also records that notices were issued to the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant had suffered from serious ailment and that various medical certificates were submitted later on along with writ petition which has not been adverted. It is submitted that the absence from duty attributed to the appellant is for reasons beyond his control. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent, Sri R.R. Khan, on the other hand, submits that various complaints were received by the respondents about the area not being properly cleaned whereafter the facts were verified and the engagement of the appellant was discontinued. The period of unauthorized absence was for months. 4. Having examined the facts of the case, we find that the engagement offered to the writ petitioner is purely contractual and is not pursuant to any recruitment made by following transparent procedure consistent with Article 16 of the Constitution of India. Engagement of the petitioner has continued for five to six years, whereafter, his services have been discontinued only on account of his absence. Considering the nature of engagement offered to the appellant, no requirement existed for initiating any regular enquiry. It is observed that opportunity of hearing was otherwise given to the appellant before discontinuing his contractual appointment. 5. On the basis of working for few years, the appellant is not entitled to be regularised in service. Considering the nature of his engagement, the decision taken by the employer to discontinue the appellant's contractual engagement due to long absence from service cannot be said to be arbitrary or malicious. The finding returned by the learned Single Judge that the services were terminated in terms of the contract is, thus, clearly borne out from the record. The order of termination otherwise cannot be said to be stigmatic in nature. 6. In that view of the matter, this special appeal fails and is dismissed. Order Date :- 21.4.2025 DKS Digitally signed by :- DEEPAK KUMAR SRIVASTWA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad