IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4588 of 2003 Preeti Kumari, Wife of Rampravesh Kumar Sharma, C/o Sri Saryug Singh (govindpur), Village + P.O. Ramchandarpur, P.S. Piparia, District Lakhisarai. --------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar. 2. The District Magistrate, Lakhisarai. 3. The District Superintendent of Education, Lakhisarai. 4. The Block Development Officer, Piparia, Lakhisarai. 5. Block Education Extension Officer, Piparia, Lakhisarai. 6. The President, Zila Parishad, Lakhisarai. 7. The Mukhia, Ramchandarpur Panchayat, P.S. Piparia, District Lakhisarai. 8. Kislay, Son of Sri Ravindra Prasad Singh, Resident of Village Ramchandarpur, P.S. Piparia, District Lakhisarai. 9. Rajiv Kumar, Son of Sri Prameshwar Singh, Resident of Village Ramchandarpur, P.S. Piparia, District Lakhisarai. 10. Uday Kumar, Son of Sri Ramnandan Singh, Resident of Village Ramchander Kumar, District Lakhisarai. ------- Respondents ----------- 3 05.08.2010 No one appears on behalf of the petitioner. Counsel for the State is present. The following prayer of the petitioner:- “1. That this writ application is being filed for issuance of a writ of „Mandamus‟ directing and commanding the concerned respondents to appoint the petitioner on the post of „Shikshamitra‟ in Ramchandrapur Panchayat after considering him as petitioner is the application for the post vide his application register Roll no.28 dated 27.2.2003 under the seal and signature of Panchayat Secretary and he is one of the eligible candidate to be selected for the post in terms of 2 rules and regulations dated 20.6.2002 of the State of Bihar by his resolution no. 1079 dated 20.06.2002 in which it has been mentioned in Clause-7 that candidates will be selected on the basis of marks obtained in Matriculation or its equivalent examination and petitioner obtained 679 marks out of 900 bearing her roll no. 0271, Roll Code No. 3230 in Bihar School Examination Board, Patna in the annual examination of the year 1994(A) and as such the petitioner is placed in the select list as the second superior candidate among all the 39 candidates but her appointment could not be made on account of fraudulent activities of Respondents no. 8,9 and 10 as they have produced forged marks-sheet showing 694 in place 604 bearing Roll No. 0233, Roll Code No. 3239 of the year 1991, 695 in place of 555 bearing Roll No. 0061, Roll Code 03238 of the year 1990 and 569 out of 700 in place less mark bearing Roll no. 0657, Roll code 03239 of the year 1999, therefore the appointment order issued by Respondent no.7 to the Respondents no. 8 to 10 are liable to be cancelled as the same are abinitio void in the eye of law because the same have been obtained after committing fraud and submitting 3 forged documents as real so that they may take advantage in appointment as has been done by the Respondents no. 8 to 10. The issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction9s) as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper is essential so that the wrong benefit in appointment given to Respondents 8 to 10 by Respondent no.7 may be annulled as being contrary to Justice, equity and fair play of executive action in the matter of appointment.” by efflux of time has been rendered infructuous, inasmuch as, the post of Siksha Mitra has already been abolished and therefore, no direction can be issued now for appointment of the petitioner on the post of Siksha Mitra. Accordingly, this application is dismissed as having become infructuous. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)