IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16589 of 2010 1. SATYENDRA KUMAR RAM S/O SHRI RAMJEE RAM R/O VILL+P.O.BARKA GAON, P.S.BHAGWANPUR HAT, DISTT-SIWAN Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DIRECTOR, PRIMARY EDUCATION BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE SIWAN 5. THE DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER SARAN DIVISION AT CHAPRA 6. THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION SARAN DIVISION AT CHAPRA 7. THE DEPUTY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER- CUM-CHAIRMAN DISTRICT EDUCATION ESTABLISHMENT COMMITTEE SIWAN 8. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION- CUM-DISTRICT PROGRAMME COORDINATOR SIWAN 9. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER BHAGAWANPUR HAT, DISTT-SIWAN 10. THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER- CUM-BLOCK PROGRAMME COORDINATOR BHAGWANPUR HAT, DISTT-SIWAN 11. GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ BARKAGAON, BLOCK BHAGWANPUR HAT, DISTRICT SIWAN THROUGH THE MUKHIYA SHRI BASHISHTHA NARAYAN SINGH S/O LATE FULENA SINGH, R/O VILL BARKA GAON, P.S.BHAGWANPUR HAT, DISTT-SIWAN 12. SHRI SANTOSH KUMAR PATHAK PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ BARKA GAON, BLOCK-BHAGWANPUR HAT, DISTT-SIWAN 13. SHRI RAM LAL SAH , THE HEADMASTER OF GOVT. PRIMARY SCHOOL SHAH TOLA BALHAN, ANCHAL, ANCHAL BHAGWANPUR HAT, DISTT-SIWAN 14. THE CHAIRMAN, SCHOOL EDUCATION COMMITTEE OF GOVT. PRIMARY SCHOOL SHAHTOLA BALHAN, ANCHAL BHAGWANPUR HAT, DISTT-SIWAN 15. THE MEMBER, DISTRICT TEACHER'S EMPLOYMENT APPELLATE AUTHORITY SIWAN - 2 - 16. SMT. MANJU DEVI W/O SHRI MANISH RAM R/O VILL BARKAGAON MISHRAWALIA, P.O.BARKAGAON, P.S.BHAGWANPUR HAT, DISTT-SIWAN ----------- 2 10/05/2011 A long history of litigation can be cut short on primary legal position which stands today. The fact is that the petitioner was initially engaged as a Panchayat Shiksha Mitra for a period of 11 months in the year 2004. After expiry of that contract, the contract of the petitioner was neither renewed nor any contract executed because Sukh Suvidha Samiti did not find the working of the petitioner to be satisfactory. There are materials to show that the petitioner raised grievance in this regard before the various authorities and a direction was given to the Panchayat to consider the claim of the petitioner or allow him to continue till the enquiry in this regard was completed. The fact is that the petitioner was never allowed to go back to the status of a Panchayat Shiksha Mitra. Further dispute arose because yet another person, namely, Manju Devi came to be engaged by the Panchayat in the vacancy caused by the petitioner. Matter dragged on. He filed a writ application before the - 3 - High Court. The High Court refused to interfere in the matter looking at the nature of the engagement as would be evident from annexure-10 and thereafter the issue was raised before the District Teachers Appointment Appellate Authority. The whole exercise carried out by the Appellate Authority was an exercise having no consequence and remained academic because the petitioner’s claim for being reinstated as a Panchayat Shiksha Mitra is a lost case now because after 1.7.2006 the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra was abolished by virtue of 2006 Rules and no person can, therefore, be appointed on the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra. If that is the present status, then the entire argument challenging the order of the Appellate Authority remains only academic and a debate and nothing more. No interference is called for in the said order. Petitioner has no right to be reinstated or re- appointed on the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra. This writ application is dismissed. AMIN/ (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)