IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10330 of 2007 SAROJ DEVI & ORS Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2/ 3/7/2008. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. The petitioners claim to have been appointed on the post of Panchayat Teacher on 17.1.2004 and 21.1.2004. In view of the Rules then existing, the appointment was contractual in nature for a period of 11 months expiring in December, 2004. The petitioners have not contended in the writ application and have not brought any material on record to demonstrate that after December,2004 their contractual services were extended. The right of the petitioner, if any, expired in December, 2004 itself. Thereafter it was an inchoate right which may or may not fructify by renewal of the contract based on fulfillment of certain criteria or circumstances. No writ application can be maintained or founded on a cause of action of an inchoate right. There is, thus, no merit in the writ application. The writ application is therefore dismissed. However, this Court does find substance in the submission of the counsel for the petitioner that earlier a panel for appointment of Panchayat Teachers was drawn up in 2002 which came to be annulled by the Director, Panchayati Raj and the Collector when the Mukhiya has made appointments from the very same panel in 2006. The petitioner, if so advised, may prefer a representation - 2 - before respondent No.4 with regard to that aspect of the matter. The Court expects the District Magistrate to enquire into the same, hear all concerned and decide the same expeditiously. If the Collector be satisfied by the enquiry of the allegations, this Court requires the Collector to proceed appropriately in law to fix accountability and liability against those concerned. KC ( Navin Sinha,J )