IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10193 of 2008 1. Arvind Chaudhary, S/0 Sri Shaukin Chaudhary, R/o Uber, P.O.- Uber, P.S.-Ghosi, Distirct-Jehanabad. 2. Bhaskar Uberia, S/o. Sri Krishna Singh, R/o-Uber, P.O.-Uber, P.S.-Ghosi, District-Jehanabad. Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Secretary Human Resources Development Department, Bihar, Patna. 3. The District Magistrate, Jehanabad. 4. The District Superintendent of Eduation, Jehanabad. 5. The Block Education Extension Officer, Ghosi(North), Jehanabad. 6. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat-Uber, Ghosi Block, Jehanabad. 7. The Secretary-cum-Panchayat Sevak, Gram Panchayat-Uber, Ghosi, Jehanabad. 8. The Chairman, Suh-Suvidha Samiti, Gram Panchayat- Uber, Ghosi, Jehanabad, ----------- 2/ 07.07.2009 Heard the counsels for the petitioner and the State. Petitioners’ grievance is that they have been terminated from their appointment as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra by the District Magistrate, Jehanabad and consequential order terminating petitioners from their posts have been issued by the Panchayat Secretary. Prayer of the petitioners is for quashing both the orders and also for a direction to the respondents to make payment of their salary honorarium as payable to Shiksha Mitra with effect from 1.4.2006 till the date termination orders were issued. The counsel for the petitioners submit that the District Education Tribunal was not constituted till date they filed writ application as such they could not get opportunity to prefer an - 2 - appeal before the appellate tribunal as provided under Rule 18 of Bihar Panchayat Elementary Teachers (Appointment and Service Conditions) Rule, 2008. Now, the Tribunal has been constituted as such liberty may be given to the petitioners to prefer an appeal before the Tribunal. Counsel for the State has filed counter affidavit and stated that petitioners were not eligible for being appointed and also that appointment itself was against non-existent posts. This application is being disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner for filing their appeal preferably within 30 days from the date. Question of limitation should not be raised by the Tribunal, it be decided on merits in accordance with law. Merit of petitioners’ case has not been considered by this Court. Sanjeet (Mridula Mishra, J.)