JUDGMENT : - Sanjay Karol, Judge(Oral) It is the petitioner’s grievance that prior to passing of order dated 8.10.2013 (Annexure P-13), conveying decision of not extending his contract as a Consultant (Ayurveda), respondents ought to have considered the recommendations so made in his favour, vide communication dated 4.10.2013 (Annexure P-12). 2. It is not in dispute that petitioner was appointed as a Consultant (Ayurveda), purely on contractual basis. Initial agreement dated 13.8.2012, was valid for only a period of one year. However, the contract was renewed, on yearly basis, after approval of respondent No.1, the apex body of respondent No.2. Such renewal was only till 3.8.2013. For further renewal his case was forwarded by respondent No.2 on 9.7.2013 (Annexure P-9). Query raised by respondent No.1, vide communication dated 9.9.2013 (Annexure P-10), stood clarified vide communication dated 19.9.2013 (Annexure P-11). On 4.10.2013 (Annexure P-12), respondent No.2 further clarified that work load in the Institute has since increased, therefore, extension be accorded in favour of the petitioner, for the period commencing from 4.8.2013 upto 3.8.2014. Request was turned down vide communicated dated 8.10.2013. 3. It be only observed that appointment of petitioner was not on regular basis. He was simply appointed as a Consultant and that too on contractual basis. Prior to filing of the instant petition, contractual period stood expired. No extension was accorded in his favour. 4. As such, petitioner does not have any legally enforceable/justiceable right, which stands infringed by the respondents. He cannot claim extension as a matter of right. 5. Respondent No.1, an apex body, was not legally obliged to examine the recommendation so made by respondent No.2, though it is not clear from record as to whether it was considered or not. In any event, non-consideration thereof, shall have no bearing on the petitioner’s rights. It cannot be said that petitioner stands prejudiced in any manner. Action of not renewing the contract, in the absence of any allegation of arbitrariness or malafides cannot be said to be illegal. 6. As such present petition, devoid of merit, is dismissed. Petition stands disposed of, so also pending application(s), if any.