SUNIL AMBWANI, J. ( 1 ) HEARD Sri Ashok Khare, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Ashok Kumar Shukla for petitioner, and Sri Aditya Narain for respondent Nos. 1 and 2, as well as Standing Counsel for respondent nos. 3 and 4. ( 2 ) A counter-affidavit of Shivakant Bajpayee, Assistant Law Officer, State Election Commission, u. P. , Lucknow has been filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 2. ( 3 ) PETITIONER was appointed by State Election Commission, U. P. on 29. 7. 2002, for elections of panchayat/local Bodies by way of local arrangement for a period of six months before regular appointment on a fixed salary of Rs. 3,600/-, on contract, in the Election Office at Firozabad, on the post of Typist/clerk from the date of joining. It was provided in the order that his services can be terminated at any time before prior notice and even before the expiry of period of contract. He accepted the appointment on the terms and conditions given in the order and joined on 31. 7. 2000. His appointment was, subsequently, extended up to 30. 6. 2001 and thereafter up to 31. 8. 2001 and that on 5. 9. 2001, his services were further extended with effect from 1. 9. 2001 until further orders. ( 4 ) BY the impugned order dated 30. 7. 2002, the Secretary of the State Election Commission communicated petitioner that since Commission has appointed a regular employee, petitioners services on contract will come to an end on 31. 7. 2002 and that after that date, the petitioner shall not be allowed to work. ( 5 ) IN the counter-affidavit of Shivakant Bajpayee, it is stated that State Election Commissions has no funds of its own. The entire expenses relating to payment of salary, including election expenses, are provided by State Government. A number of staff of the office of Commission as well as District Election offices is sanctioned by State Government. Initially, it was proposed that the staff/employees of the Commission be appointed from the retrenched/surplus employees of sharda Sahayak Project as also of Local Bodies. Thereafter, necessary vacancies were proposed to be filled up by Class III employees of the Government on deputation for election of panchayats and Local Bodies, and that the proposal of the State Government was communicated by the Secretary of the Commission on 13. 10. Thereafter, necessary vacancies were proposed to be filled up by Class III employees of the Government on deputation for election of panchayats and Local Bodies, and that the proposal of the State Government was communicated by the Secretary of the Commission on 13. 10. 1999 to all Chair Persons of Zila Panchayats, corporations, Development Authorities and Nagar Panchayats. Sanction of the State government has been extended up to 28. 2. 2003. After the appointment of retrenched employees on vacant posts, a notification dated 14. 12. 2000 was issued notifying 49 posts of Junior Clerks for District Election Offices and 7 posts of Typists only for the office of State Election commission. After written test and interview, the required vacancies were filled up by process of selection and interview. Even after filling up those posts, about 31 posts of Junior Clerks were still pending in the District Election Office for which a notification was issued on 9. 9. 2001. Again, a large number of candidates applied and all vacant posts were filled up by the process of selection. General Panchayat Elections were to be held in the beginning of the year 2001 and local Body elections were to be held in 2002. In order to provide election work, optional adjustments/arrangements were made to appoint Junior Clerks on contract basis on fixed salary. There is no post of Typist/clerk sanctioned by the State Government in District election Office. Only seven posts of Typist/clerks were proposed for the office of the commission. Petitioner was appointed on contract basis for completion of the election work and his services were liable to be terminated at any time without prior notice. He has no right to continue or to hold the post on contract basis. Anil Kumar Agrawal is working as Junior Clerk on deputation since before the appointment of the petitioner. Km. Pinki Singh was appointed as Junior Clerk by selection. On her transfer. Sri Rajesh Arora has been transferred and posted at District Election Office, firozabad. ( 6 ) IT is submitted that petitioner was appointed as Typist/clerk and not as Clerk and that no person has been appointed as Typist/clerk at Firozabad by regular selection and thus the basis of the order that Commission has appointed a regular employee is incorrect. The order issued by the state Election Commission dated 13. 10. ( 6 ) IT is submitted that petitioner was appointed as Typist/clerk and not as Clerk and that no person has been appointed as Typist/clerk at Firozabad by regular selection and thus the basis of the order that Commission has appointed a regular employee is incorrect. The order issued by the state Election Commission dated 13. 10. 1999 shows that in the District Election Offices, two type of posts, namely, Senior Clerk and Junior Clerk, were advertised. The order required these candidates to have knowledge of typing and they were subjected to type test in Hindi. Government Order dated 19. 4. 2002 shows that in District Election Offices, the post of Typist has not been sanctioned. Annexure ca-3 is an advertisement dated 14. 9. 2000 inviting applications at Headquarters and District Level Offices for seven posts of Typist and 49 posts of Junior clerks. It has been explained in the counter-affidavit that all these seven posts of Typist were advertised for Headquarters of State Election Commission and not for District Election Offices. ( 7 ) IN the facts and circumstances, I find that petitioner was appointed in view of exigency of work on contract, and on consolidated salary for a period of six months subject to specific condition that his services can be terminated at any time and are subject to regular appointment on the post. The period of appointment was extended from time to time and that after selection of regular employees on the post of Junior Clerk, his services have been terminated. The petitioner does not have any right to hold the post and that he did not take opportunity in appearing in selections by direct recruitment. ( 8 ) FURTHER, the contention that he was appointed as Typist/clerk is not established inasmuch as no post of Typist/clerk was sanctioned in the District Election Offices. In any case, the petitioner will have a right to be considered in the next selections. The writ petition lacks merits and is dismissed. .