Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:108015 Court No. - 52 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 8957 of 2025 Petitioner :- Dharm Prakash Chaturvedi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ganesh Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J. Heard Mr. Ganesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent. This writ petition has been filed with a prayer to direct the respondent no.2 to consider and pass appropriate order on the application of the petitioner dated 21.03.2025 and a further prayer to direct the respondent no.4 to extend the service of the petitioner for the period of 2025-26 and to pay the honorarium. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed on the post of entrant teacher/resource teacher in the year 2005 pursuant to the notification. The appointment letter was issued on 19.11.2005 and he has been working satisfactorily till 2024 and when the extension for the period of 2025-26 was not granted, he moved a representation before the authority concerned, but nothing was done till date. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for State-respondent submits that there are serious allegations against the petitioner, who has not performed his duties properly. He further submits that from the records itself, it is clear that the petitioner's appointment was contractual and there is nothing on record to show that the service of the petitioner was renewed or contract period was extended from time to time, therefore, he has no right to be continued on the said post. I have perused the entire records, it is found that the petitioner does not have any right to continue on a contractual post, where his contract has admittedly come to an end. In the case of Director, Institute of Management Development, U.P. v. Smt. Pushpa Srivastava, AIR 1992 SC 2070, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that in the matter of contractual appointment, employee has no right to continue in post after efflux of time. Even if he/she continues beyond the fixed period, it would not confer any right to claim his/her renewal or regularisation. In view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the above referred case, no interference is called for. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. Order Date :- 8.7.2025 Jitendra/- Digitally signed by :- JITENDRA KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- JITENDRA KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad