IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12076 of 2011 Dhananjay Kumar aged about 31 years son of Subash Chander Singh, resident of Dhandhana Chak P.O. Nesarpura, P.S. Phulwarisharif, and Dist.Patna. ---Petitioner. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through Principal Secretary, H.R.D.Department,Vikas Bhawan,Patna. 2. Director, Bihar Education Project Council, Boring Canal Road, Patna. 3. District Magistrate, Patna. 4. District Education Officer, Patna. 5. District Programme Officer, Elementary and Serv. Shiksha Abhiyojna,Patna Jagdeopath,Bailey Road,Patna. 6. Block Education Extension Officer, Phulwarisharif Patna. 7. Sri Shashi Bhushan Roy, son of late Chandi Prasad Roy,R/o Mohalla- Western Maheanagar, Road-3 House no.1, Patliputra,Dist.Patna. Ex. D.S.E. Patna at present posted in the office of Director, Secondary Education Bihar, Patna. ---Respondents. ----------- 02 27.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner was engaged on contractual basis as would appear from order contained in Annexure-1. By the order impugned dated 09.07.2011 notice has been issued to him that his service on contract basis shall stand disengaged w.e.f. 31.07.2011. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that along with petitioner several other persons were engaged on contract basis and they are allowed to serve on contract basis whereas the petitioner has been discontinued. It is next contended that no reason has been assigned in the impugned order for his disengagement. True it is that persons similarly situated must be treated equally but such equality has to be demonstrated with all relevant facts and circumstances. There is no adequate pleadings on record to demonstrate that petitioner as well as those who are allowed to be continued are same and similar. At this stage, this Court may notice 2 that while discharging his duties on contract basis petitioner was made accused in a case under Sections 457 and 380 of the Penal Code. This Court, based on pleadings on record, is not inclined to accept the submission of the petitioner that he has been discriminated in the matter of continuance of engagement on contract basis. The respondents have invoked Clause 3 of the conditions contained in order of engagement on contract basis. In a matter of engagement on contract basis, the parties are governed by terms and conditions of the contract. This Court, in CWJC No. 9198 of 2011 (Mrigendra Srivastava & Ors. vs. Power Grid Corporation of India Limited & Anr.), by order dated 30.06.2011, has already held that in a case of disengagement of an employee, on contract basis, reasons are not required to be assigned for invoking the terms of contract. This Court does not find any merit in this application. It is, accordingly, dismissed. Sym ( Kishore K. Mandal, J. )