IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6715 of 2010 1. AJAY KUMAR S/O SRI SAHDEO PRASAD R/O VILL.- CHHABILAPUR, P.S.- MANPUR, BIHARSHARIF, DISTT.- NALANDA 2. GAJADHAR RAVIDAS S/O SRI CHANDESHWAR RAVIDAS R/O VILL.- MAKHDUMPUR, P.S.- MANPUR, BIHARSHARIF, DISTT.- NALANDA 3. USHA KUMARI W/O SRI SANOJ SHARMA R/O VILL.- BAROTI, P.S.- DEEP NAGAR, BIHARSHARIF, DISTT.- NALANDA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, NALANDA 3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATION EMPLOYMENT APPELLATE AUTHORITY NALANDA (BIHARSHARIF) THROUGH ITS MEMBER 4. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, NALANDA 5. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER BIHARSHARIF, NALANDA 6. THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER BIHARSHARIF, NALANDA 7. THE AREA EDUCATION OFFICER BIHARSHARIF, NALANDA 8. THE MUKHIYA, GRAM PANCHAYAT CHHABILAPUR BLOCK- BIHARSHARIF, P.S.- MANPUR, DISTT.- NALANDA 9. GHANSHYAM PRASAD S/O SACHIDANAND SINGH R/O VILL.- NEPURA, P.S.- MANPUR, DISTT.- NALANDA 10. SUBODH KUMAR S/O RAMDEO PASWAN R/O VILL.- NEPURA, P.S.- DEEPNAGAR, DISTT.- NALANDA 11. SUJATA KUMARI D/O SATYENDRA SINGH R/O VILL.- BEROTI, P.S.- MANPUR, DISTT.- NALANDA ----------- 2 17/01/2011 The District Education Employment Appellate Authority, Nalanda at Biharsharif is correct in finding that even if the so called private respondents’ - 2 - appointments are interfered with, it does not help the petitioners in filling up the vacancies created by them because they cannot be appointed on the post of Shiksha Mitra now in the facts and circumstances of the case. Even otherwise, the so called materials which the petitioners want to rely on to nit pick on the selection made, have to be viewed with jaundiced eye because the so called foundational facts is the version of the Mukhia who is fountain head of the majority of the litigations arising out of such appointments and is the reason behind the same. The Court is not inclined to set aside the impugned order passed by the Appellate Authority when the petitioners are not going to be benefited out of the vacancies created by the private respondents. This writ application is dismissed. AMIN/ (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)