IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13848 of 2010 1. MRITYUNJAY KUMAR SINGH S/O SRI NAVIN PD. SINGH R/O VILL.- FULWARIA, P.S.- DHORAYIA, DISTT.- BANKA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, BANKA 3. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, BANKA 4. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, DHORAYIA, DISTT.- BANKA 5. THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER, DHORAYIA, DISTT.- BANKA 6. THE MUKHIYA, SIJHAT BALIAS GRAM PANCHAYAT DHORAYIA, DISTT.- BANKA 7. THE PANCHAYAT SEVAK-CUM-PANCHAYAT SECRETARY SIJHAT BALIAS GRAM PANCHAYAT, DHORAYIA, DISTT.- BANKA ----------- 2 15/04/2011 Petitioner’s claim for appointment as a Panchayat Shiksha Mitra relating to the year 2003 became the subject matter of adjudication before the District Teachers Appointment Appellate Authority, Banka. After hearing the petitioner, the claim of the petitioner has been rejected primarily on the ground that the petitioner had not furnished proof of marks obtained by him at the time of making such an application. Petitioner seriously disputes this fact that he had furnished all the materials and it was a mischief on the part of the Panchayat to deny him the benefit and to - 2 - accommodate the people with lower marks. In the opinion of this Court whatever be the adjudication of the appellate authority, the actual position is that such dispute remains academic now because petitioner was a claimant for appointment on the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra, the post which came to be abolished from 1.7.2006 after coming into force the new Rules. If the petitioner was not appointed on the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra, he cannot be appointed now on the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra and since he was not holding the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra, he cannot be appointed as a Panchayat teacher. In view of the above, no interference is warranted with the impugned order not because of the findings given therein but because of the changed circumstances and the Rule which is in existence as of now. Even otherwise, the issue relates to the year 2003 and much has changed since then with regard to such appointment. This writ application has no merit. It is dismissed accordingly. AMIN/ (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.) - 3 -