IMPORTANT POINT
The rights of the petitioner, as a contractual employee, were governed exclusively by the terms of the contract, and the dispute arising out of the contract of service could not be determined in the present proceedings.

JUDGMENT :

1. The petitioner, a Safai Karmchari, engaged on contract by the Nagar Palika Parishad, Modi Nagar, Ghaziabad, assails the order dated 29.04.2023, determining the contract and in consequence terminating his services. The order aforesaid has been passed by the Executive Officer, Nagar Palika Parishad, Modi Nagar, Ghaziabad, and, shall hereinafter be referred to as the 'impugned order'.

2. The petitioner was appointed on the basis of a contract as a Safai Karmi (Sweeper) with the Nagar Palika Parishad, Modi Nagar, Ghaziabad, in terms of a letter of appointment dated 25.07.2006. The letter of appointment was issued by the Executive Officer, Nagar Palika Parishad, Modi Nagar, Ghaziabad (for short, 'the Nagar Palika'). The appointment as aforesaid was made in terms of Government Orders dated 26.08.2005 and 09.05.2006, after selection by a selection committee, constituted for the purpose by the District Magistrate, Ghaziabad. The letter of appointment says that the petitioner was appointed on contract as a Safai Karmi on a pay of Rs.2130/-. It was made explicit that the appointment is entirely contractual and made subject to the condition that in case the candidate's work is not found satisfactory, his appointment would be terminated.

3. It is the petitioner's case that though appointed as a Safai Karmi on contract basis, the Nagar Palika have assigned him the duties of a driver. The petitioner has been paid salary of a safai karmi on contract basis. A pay slip relating to the petitioner has been annexed as Annexure No.2 to the writ petition, which shows that it relates to the month of September, 2021. Reference to this pay slip would be made later in this judgment. The petitioner acknowledges the fact that though he is working on the post of a Safai Karmi since 25.07.2006, he has not been confirmed or regularized in service. It is averred in the writ petition that the letter of appointment shows that the petitioner's services can be terminated if his work is not found satisfactory. It appears that the elections to the Nagar Palika were notified and the petitioner staked his candidature for the post of the Chairman of the Nagar Palika Parishad. He made an application, seeking sanction of leave from 15.04.2023 to 26.04.2023, in order to enable him to contest the said elections. It is the petitioner's case that since there was a condition to submit a No Objection Certificate, he secured one from the Tehsildar, Tehsil Modi Nagar (Ghaziabad) and duly submitted it. It is the petitioner's further case that a ‘no dues certificate’ was secured on 18.04.2023, also from the Tehsildar, showing that there were no dues against the petitioner for the year 2022-23. After all formalities were completed, the petitioner contested the elections to the post of the Chairman, Nagar Palika, but lost at the hustings. On 29.04.2023, the Executive Officer of the Nagar Palika terminated the petitioner's services on ground that he had contested elections to the office of the President of the Nagar Palika in the elections of 2023, which was in violation of the service conditions under the Uttar Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1916 (for short, 'the Act'). It was mentioned that the petitioner's contract was being determined on that ground. The petitioner moved an application on 26.05.2023 to revoke the order of his termination from service, addressed to the Executive Officer. Nothing came out of it. Accordingly, this writ petition has been instituted by the petitioner, assailing the order impugned.

4. Parties have exchanged affidavits.

5. Heard Mr. Harish Chandra, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Ms. Amrita Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel on behalf of respondent No.1 and Mr. Radhamani Saxena, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Manu Saxena, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Nagar Palika.

6. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a low paid employee of the Nagar Palika and applied for a no objection certificat