Allahabad High Court
SUSHILA KUMARI (CONTRACTUAL WARD AYA)versusSTATE OF U.P AND 4 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The petition is not maintainable as it pertains to a contractual dispute between private entities, and the appeal is dismissed.
Summary
The appellant, Sushila Kumari, a contractual employee engaged by the private firm Avani Paridhi Energy and Communications Ltd., challenged her disengagement before the High Court of Allahabad. The single judge observed that the dispute was purely between private parties and that a contractual termination does not give rise to the petition filed. On appeal, the Division Bench affirmed that the petition was not maintainable as it concerned a private contractual dispute. The bench also noted that the remedies sought had already been addressed in paragraph 11 of the impugned order. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed for lack of merit.
Issues considered
- Whether a petition filed by a contractual employee against a private employer is maintainable before the High Court.
- Whether the disengagement of a contractual employee gives rise to the relief sought in the petition.
Subjects
- contractual employee
- maintainability
- private entity
- service law
- appeal dismissed
- High Court of Allahabad
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 459 of 2026
Sushila Kumari (Contractual Ward Aya)
.....Appellant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P And 4 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Appellant(s) : Khwaja Shamshad Ahmad, Sagheer
Ahmad, Shyam Mohan Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 3
HON'BLE SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH, J.
HON'BLE SWARUPAMA CHATURVEDI, J.
1. Having heard Shri Khwaja Shamshad Ahmad, learned counsel for the
original petitioner/appellant and Shri T.B. Pandey, learned counsel for the
respondent, we find no error in the impugned order dated 25.02.2026 passed
by learned single judge in Sushila Kumari vs State of U.P. and 4 Ors.,
2026:AHC:42259. To the extent there is no dispute to the observation made
by the learned single judge that the petitioner was a contractual employee
engaged by the respondent Avani Paridhi Energy and Communications (P)
Ltd., a wholly private entity, the disengagement of the petitioner by the said
private entity may never give rise to the present petition. Being a contractual
dispute, between private entities, the present petition is not maintainable.
2. As to the remedies, learned single judge has already provided for the same
by means of paragraph 11 of the order impugned.
3. Accordingly, the appeal lacks merit and is dismissed.
(Swarupama Chaturvedi,J.) (Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.)
April 20, 2026
Prakhar
Digitally signed by :-
PRAKHAR SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…