[2026:RJ-JP:21609-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 510/2026 In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.19306/2025 Paras Kumar Gupta S/o Shri Mohan Lal Ji Gupta, Aged 51 Years, R/o Near Gayatri Mandir Jhalawar (Raj.) 326001. ----Appellant Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary To Education Department (Elementary Education) Govt. Secretariat Jaipur (Raj.) 2. State Project Director, Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan And Commissioner School Education Council (Rajasthan School Shiksha Parishad) Ground Floor, Block-6, Dr. S. Radha Krishnan Shiksha Sankool, Jawharlal Nehru Marg, Jaipur, Raj. 3. District Education Officer, (Elementary/primary Education) Cum District Project Coordinator, “Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan” Jhalawar (Raj.) 4. Chief Block Education Officer, “Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan” Block Manohar Thana Village Manohar Thana District Jhalawar (Raj.) ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Mutha HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR Order 21/05/2026 1. Heard on application (No.378/2026) for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. 2. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed. Delay in filing the appeal is condoned. [2026:RJ-JP:21609-DB] (2 of 2) [SAW-510/2026] 3. The appeal preferred by the appellant stated that he was appointed on contract basis as a Consultant for the civil works under the State Project Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan. The services of the appellant on contract basis were dispensed with on account of the collapse of the school building. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that without giving an opportunity of hearing, he has been disengaged which could not have been done. 5. We find that the post on which the appellant was engaged was of Consultant qua the civil work. He was, therefore, responsible to see that the building is properly constructed, which was not done. No right is created in favour of the contractual employee. Article 310 of the Constitution of India also does not permit for reinstatement. 6. In view thereof, the order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 28.01.2026 does not want any interference. 7. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. 8. Pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of. (ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),ACTING CJ N.GANDHI/RAJAT/50