IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7768 of 2004 RAGNI DEVI, WIFE OF LATE HRIDAY NARAYAN JHA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-TENGARI, POLICE STATION-MADHEPUR, DISTRICT-MADHUBANI. ………PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH SECRETARY, RULAR DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, BIHAR, PATNA. 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, MADHUBANI. 3. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, MADHUBANI. 4. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, MADHEPUR BLOCK, MADHUBANI. 5. THE CHAIRMAN, GRAM SHIKSHA SAMITTI, KARHARA PANCHAYAT, MADHEPUR, MADHUBANI. 6. MUKHIYA, KARHARA PANCHAYAT, MADHEPUR, DISTT-MADHUBANI. 7. PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, KARHARA PANCHAYAT, MADHEPUR, DISTT. MADHUBANI. 8. KAMAL NARAIN THAKUR, SON OF RAM KRISHNA THAKUR, KARAHAR, P.S.-MADHEPUR, MADHUBANI. 9. RAM KRISHNA CHAKRABARTI, SON OF JAHURI MANDAL RESIDENT OIF VILLAGE- KURSON, P.S. MADHEPUR, DISTT. MADHUBANI. ………RESPONDENTS. ----------- 04/ 26.11.2010 No one appears for the petitioner. Counsel for the State is present. In the opinion, of this court there would be no occasion to issue a direction for appointment of the 2 petitioner on the post of Shiksha Mitra inasmuch as the said part itself stands abolished with effect from 01.07.2006. However, her grievance as against the appointment of respondent no. 8 and 9, on the post of Shiksha Mitra can still to be looked into by the District Teachers Appellate Authority. That being so, if the petitioner would file a complaint before the concerned District Teachers Appellate Authority, as with regard to selection and appointment of respondent nos. 8 and 9, the same would be disposed of on merits without going into question of delay but only after affording opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and respondent nos. 8 and 9. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this application is disposed off. Ranjan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)