IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2890 of 2009 Krishna Kumar Paswan . Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors . ----------- 5. 04.07.2011 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, State and the learned Counsel appearing for Respondent no. 6. The petitioner had been engaged as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra by an order dated 25.4.2003 for eleven months. Thereafter he was not re-engaged on the post as his qualification was only Matriculation and by 2004 guidelines relating to Panchayat Shiksha Mitra Appointment the educational qualification for this post was enhanced to Intermediate. Subsequently in the year 2006 the petitioner has passed Upshastri examination, which h is equivalent to Intermediate as such he is claiming that on account of enhancement of his qualification he became entitled for the reinstatement on the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra and also for absorption on the post of Panchayat Shikshak, as provided under 2006 Panchayat Teachers’ appointment Rules. The petitioner had not been re-engaged on the post of Panchayat Shikshak in the year 2004. He had not been given second and third extension, as such on the appointed date in 2006 he was not working on the post of panchayat Shiksha mitra. Only a Panchayat Shiksha Mitra holding the post on the appointed date, would have been entitled for absorpition. Petitioner cannot claim his re-instatement. So far as Respondent no.6 is concerned, his appointment was a fresh appointment made in the year 2007, The petitioner has nod reason to have any grievance against the appointment of respondent no.6. I do not find any merit in this application. It is accordingly dismissed. A.Kumar/- (Mridula Mishra,J.)