Allahabad High Court
KAPIL KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- MANJU RANI CHAUHAN
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner must make a fresh application before the District Basic Education Officer, and the Court will not directly order renewal of the contract.
Summary
The petitioner, Kapil Kumar, a Part Time Instructor of Health and Physical Education since 2013, sought a writ directing the respondents to renew his contract and allow him to resume duties after his services were not renewed beyond the 2022-2023 session without notice or hearing. He also requested the authority to decide on his representation dated 24‑08‑2026. The respondents argued that there is no provision for renewal after a three‑year lapse and that the petitioner's application was untimely. The Court, without adjudicating the merits, directed the petitioner to file a fresh application before the District Basic Education Officer within three weeks, accompanied by a certified copy of the order. The Court further instructed the respondent to consider and decide the fresh representation within six weeks, providing a reasoned order after a proper hearing. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed without granting the relief sought.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to renewal of his part‑time instructor contract after a lapse of three years without prior notice or hearing.
- Whether the Court can compel the respondent to renew the contract or must the petitioner approach the competent authority afresh.
- Whether the delay in filing the representation bars the petitioner from obtaining relief.
Subjects
- contract renewal
- part‑time instructor
- education service
- writ petition
- administrative law
- delay in representation
- hearing
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 15536 of 2026
Kapil Kumar
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Satish Chandra Dubey
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 52
HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Shashi Kant Srivastava,
learned counsel for respondent nos.2 & 3 and learned Standing
Counsel for the State-respondents.
The writ petition has been filed with the following prayers:-
"(i) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to renew the
petitioner's contract/services of Part Time Instructor and permit him to discharge his
duties as Part Time Instructor (Health and Physical Education) at Upper Primary
School Ghunghaura, Block-Bilsanda, District-Pilibhit, in pursuant of contract order
dated 09.07.2013 issued by respondent no.2 and further to pay the monthly
honorarium in accordance with law.
(ii) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondent no.2 to
take an appropriate decision in furtherance of petitioner's pending representation dated
24.08.2026 forthwith."
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has
been working as a Part Time Instructor since 2013 and that his
services were renewed up to the session 2022-2023. After the said
session, the petitioner has not been permitted to work, without any
notice or opportunity of hearing. He further submits that a
representation dated 24.08.2026 was placed before the concerned
authority, requesting renewal of his services, but no decision has
been taken so far. Therefore, it is prayed that a direction may be
issued to respondent no.2 to consider and decide the claim of the
WRIA No. 15536 of 2026
2
petitioner, in accordance with law, within a stipulated period.
Learned counsel for the respondent-BSA submits that there is no
provision for renewal of service as a Part Time Instructor where the
petitioner approaches the Court after three years from the last
renewal, i.e., the session 2022-2023. Even otherwise, the application
for renewal was made for the first time on 24.08.2026, which is
much after the session 2022-2023. However, he submits that in case
the petitioner moves a fresh representation before the competent
authority, an appropriate order shall be passed in accordance with
law.
Considering the facts and circumstance of the case but without
expressing any opinion on the merits of the case set up on behalf of
the petitioner, the present writ petition is disposed of by providing
that petitioner may make fresh application/representation, ventilating
all his grievances, supported by such documents, as may be advised,
before the respondent no.2 District Basic Education Officer, District-
Pilibhit, within three weeks from today along with a certified copy of
this order. On such representation being made, respondent no.2 shall
make all endeavours to consider and decide the same, strictly in
accordance with law, by means of a reasoned and speaking order,
after giving proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as
expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks
from the date of production of certified copy of this order, if there is
no legal impediment.
(Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.)
September 24, 2026
Rahul.
Digitally signed by :-
RAHUL GOSWAMI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…