IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11974 of 2006 AASHISH KUMAR son of Siyaram Singh resident of village Ahiyapur Panchayat Sahbajpur Block Mushari P. S. Ahiyapur, District- Muzaffapur. … Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. Through the Chief Secretary Old Secretariat Government of Bihar. 3. the Education Secretary Government of Bihar New Secretariat Building Patna. 4. The District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur. 5. the District Education officer, Muzaffapur. 6. The District Education Superintendent Muzaffarpur. 7. The Secretary Gram Panchayati Raj of Panchayat Shahbajpur P. S. Ahiyapur District- Muzaffarpur. 8. The Mukhiya Gram Panchayati Raj of Panchayat Shahbajpur P. S. Ahiyapur District Muzaffapur. … Respondents. ----------- 2. 31.08.2010 Having heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State as also taking into account the following prayer of the petitioner in this writ application; “1. That this is an application for issuance of Rule NISI and also issuance for writ/writs, order/orders, instruction/instructions, direction/directions to the respondents after issuance the writ of mandamus upon the respondents that why and how the respondents has ignored the claim and entity of the petitioner even when the panel was prepared of the merit list and was approved by the appropriate and authorized obtaining the proper paraphernalia’s by the respondents and the respondents has completely ignored the merit list which was prepared upon and after examining all relevant points which was fixed by the respondents for the preparation of merit list the merit list prepared by the respondents was completely ignored and threshed by 2 themselves itself and the lesser amount marks obtained persons were selected ignoring and crushing the merit of the petitioner in the seriatim list your Lordships if deem think fit and proper may issue the writ of serceorai and also perused the record by your Lordships own or any fit and proper agencies if your Lordships may think fit and proper your Lordships may give an proper inquiry to any of the agency which Your Lordship satisfaction to enquire the entire matter and to examined the whole matter upon which the respondents has sat as a poisonous snake. That your Lordships may till the disposal of this writ application and during the pendency of this writ application may deem think fit and proper Lordships may direct the respondents for stop functioning upon and after the joining by a wrongful person upon a wrongful acts by the respondents so that the one post may be kept vacant till the disposal of this writ application only because of that from the date of preparing the merit list till this date of filing the writ application the petitioner has exercise his best effort to attract the respondents concern from the wrongful prepared list to the correct and rightful manner of act which is expected by the petitioner from the respondent till this date and upon the failure of several time the petitioner has got no option left except to file this writ application before this Hon’ble High Court for your lordships kind perusal.” this Court would find that the only substantial relief prayed by the petitioner is for getting his selection and appointment on the post of Shiksha Mitra. 3 The submission of counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was wrongly ignored/discarded in course of selection/appointment on the post of Shiksha Mitra would however now be of no avail inasmuch as the post of Shiksha Mitra has been abolished w.e.f. 1.7.2006 whereas writ application was filed on 26.9.2006. Thus no relief for appointment of the petitioner on the post of Shiksha Mitra can be given to the petitioner and therefore no useful purpose would be served in view giving into the issue of earlier illegal consideration and/or wrong denial of the post of Shiksha Mitra. Counsel for the petitioner would however submit that even if it is held that the petitioner cannot be now appointed on the post of Shiksha Mitra, on account of abolition of the said post, the illegality in the appointment of daughter-in-law of Mukhiya on the post of Shiksha Mitra and her eventual absorption on the post of Panchayat Shikshak w.e.f. 1.7.2006 would still give a cause of action to the petitioner to maintain this writ petition. Unfortunately while in this writ application something of this nature has been stated but the said daughter-in-law of Mukhiya or for that purpose Mukhiya has not been made 4 party by name and therefore in this situation this Court can not allow the petitioner to assail appointment of the daughter in law of Mukhia. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner himself submits that the matter relating to illegality in the appointment of Mukhiya’s daughter-in-law was subject matter of an enquiry before the Collector of the district. If that be, so, the petitioner will be at liberty to move Collector for his limited grievance as against selection and appointment of Mukhiya’s daughter-in-law which will be decided by the Collector of district and/or District Teachers Appellate Authority strictly in accordance with law but only after giving an opportunity of hearing to both Mukhiya and his daughter-in law. It is however made clear that this Court has not expressed its opinion on the alleged illegality in the appointment of daughter-in-law of Mukhiya who as noted above in fact is not even a party to this writ application. With the aforementioned observations and directions, this writ application is disposed of. kanchan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)