IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10054 of 2009 LALIT KUMAR RAM, SON OF LATE BUDDHU RAM, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-RANWAY, P.S.-KEWATI, DISTT.- DARBHANGA ………. PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Secretary, Primary and Adult Education Department,Bihar,Patna. 3. The District Magistrate, Darbhanga 4. The District Superintendent of Education Officer, Darbhanga 5. The Block Development Officer Kewati Block, Kewati, District- Darbhanga. 6. The Block Education Officer, Kewai Block, Kewati, District- Darbhanga. 7. Mukhiya, Kewati Gram Panchayat, Kewati, P.S. Kewati, District- Darbhanga. 8. Pranay Suman, S/o Sri Dinesh Jha, Resident of village-Kewati, P.S. Kewati, District-Darbhanga ……………. Respondents. ----------- 2. 09.09.2009 Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing for the state. Petitioner’s grievance is that in Kewati Gram Panchayat , in violation of the guidelines, respondent No. 8, Pranay Suman was appointed on the post of Panchayat Shikcha Mitra as one, Rajeev Kumar who had highest mark, did not join the post of Panchayat Shikcha Mitra. Petitioner’s case is that he was the next person having second highest mark, as such, he should have been appointed in 2 stead of respondent No. 8. Selection on the post of Panchayat Shikcha Mitra was held sometime, in 2003-04. A series of changes has taken place. Now the post of Panchayat Shikcha Mitra do not exist. Persons, who were selected, are working on the post of Panchayat Teachers. Petitioner is relying upon a letter issued by Regional Deputy Director, Education, Darbhanga Division, Darbhanga dated 07.07.2008 wherein it has been stated that allowing respondent No. 8 to join on the post of Panchayat Shikcha Mitra, in case of non-joining of the first candidate, is illegal and he can be terminated from his service but so far the petitioner is concerned, in the light of the departmental guidelines, he cannot be appointed. I do not find that what relief petitioner expects to get on account of Annexure-4. Without considering the merit of the case, it is being disposed of, for the reason that after so many years, the petitioner cannot claim any right. However, if so advised, he may approach the Appellate Tribunal for the relief which has been prayed for, in the present writ application. AKV/ (Mridula Mishra, J.)