IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1642 of 2007 RAJESH KUMAR SINGH, son of Shri Jholi Singh, resident of village- Chidhari Kanunago, Police Station- Raj Nagar, District- Madhubani. …. Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Director, Primary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. The District Magistrate, Madhubani. 5. The District Superintendent of Education, Madhubani. 6. The Block Development Officer, Raj Nagar, Block, District- Madhubani. 7. The Block Education Extension Officer, Raj Nagar, Block, District- Madhubani. 8. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj Chichari, Kanungo, Raj Nagar, Block, Madhubani. 9. The Panchayat Sewak, Chichari Kanunago, Panchayat, Raj Nagar, Block, Madhubani. 10. Smt. Rangila Kumari, wife of Sri Rama Nand Deo, Resident of village- Chichari, Buyurg, Police Station- Raj Nagar, District Madhubani. 11. Sri Bhola Prasad Yadav, son of Sri Dhanik Lal Yadav, resident of village- Kewan P. S. Raj Nagar, District- Madhubani. … Respondents. ----------- 2. 31.08.2010 Having heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State as also taking into account the only prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reading as follows; “1. That this application is being filed for issuance of an appropriate writ directing the respondent authorities to appoint the petitioner as “Shiksha Mitra” in Chichari Kanunago Panchayat within the District of Madhubani as the respondent no. 10 and 11 who are possessing lesser marks than the petitioner. And/or any other relief/reliefs to which the petitioner is entitled in the facts and circumstances of this case.” 2 relates to basically the selection/appointment of the petitioner on the post of Shiksha Mitra, which has already been abolished w.e.f. 1.7.2006 whereas this writ application was filed on 7.2.2007, the same must be held to have become infructuous. As with regard to the remaining grievance of the petitioner relating to the alleged illegality in selection of respondent no. 10 and 11, it would be open for the petitioner to approach the District Magistrate, Madhubani, respondent no. 4. In the event, the petitioner would file a fresh representation; the District Magistrate, Madhubani would take an appropriate decision as with regard to alleged illegality in the selection / appointment of respondent nos. 10 and 11 within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. It is, however, made clear that any decision adverse to the interest of respondent nos. 10 and 11 would be taken only after issuing notice and/or giving opportunity of hearing to them. This Court would also make it clear that while it has not gone into the merit of the claim of the petitioner as with regard to illegality in the appointment of respondent 3 nos. 10 and 11 but then if the Collector after issuing notice and/or hearing them would find their appointment as Shiksha Mitra was vitiated, he will have also power and jurisdiction to cancel their appointment irrespective of the fact that their services have been absorbed as Panchayat Shikshak only on the basis of their continuing as Shiksha Mitra as on 30.6.2006. In such event, the resultant vacancy caused on the post of Panchayat Shikshak shall be filled up strictly in accordance with law and in terms of Bihar Panchayat Shikshak (Niyukti Avam Sevashart) Niyamayali, 2006. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this writ application is disposed of. kanchan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)