IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5884 of 2008 Gupteshwar Choudhary, son of Sri Rama Shankar Choudhary, resident of village Diyan, P.O.- Ramgarh, P.S. Mohania, District- Kaimur (Bhabua). ………… Petitioner Versus 1.The State Of Bihar 2.The Secretary, Primary, Secondary and Adult Education Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 3.District Magistrate-cum-Chairman, Sarb Shiksha Abhiyan, Kaimur (Bhabua) 4.District Superintendent of Education-cum-District Programme Co-ordinator, Sarb Shiksha Abhiyan, Kaimur (Bhabua) 5.Block Development Officer, Mohania, P.S. Mohania, District- Kaimur (Bhabua) 6.Block Education Extension Officer, Mohania, P.S. Mohania, District- Kaimur (Bhabua) 7.The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj, Bhokhari, P.O. Mohania, District- Kaimur (Bhabua) 8.The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj, Bhokhari, P.O. Mohania, District- Kaimur(Bhabua) 9.Phul Tara Kumari @ Phul Tara Kumari Devi, wife of Sri Guddu Prasad, resident of village- Saray, P.O.- Ramgarh, P.S. Mohania, District- Kaimur(Bhabua). …………. Respondents ----------- 2. 25/07/2011 The order of the Collector, Kaimur dated 12.12.2007, as contained in Annexure-11, was in respect of two persons. Case of the petitioner was considered by the Collector on remand from this Court. It was held that after completing his training on 3.6.2003, petitioner did not join his duty and went on leave on the ground of illness, which was not possible in view of the fact that engagement of the petitioner as Shiksha Mitra was for 11 months on contractual basis in which there was no provision of leave. 2 In respect of the candidate appointed subsequently, namely, Fultara Devi, it has been found by the Collector that she was aged less than the minimum required age for appointment as Shiksha Mitra. Hence, by this common order, representation of the petitioner has been rejected and also an order has been issued for cancellation of engagement of said candidate, who was appointed after the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said Fultara Devi, whose order of appointment has been cancelled by the Collector, has moved this Court in C.W.J.C.No.4923 of 2008 and she has been directed to approach the concerned Appellate Authority. He submits that in fact petitioner had joined the post after 3.6.2003 and was paid his honorarium also till 2004. However, evidence of the same had not been produced before the Collector. He submits that the Collector only relied upon the report received in this regard from the Mukhiya. Since the matter relates to verification of facts from records with regard to actual joining of the petitioner and payment of his honorarium, petitioner is also granted liberty 3 to approach the concerned Appellate Authority challenging the findings of the Collector in his respect. If the petitioner does that within one month from today, the Appellate Authority shall consider his application on merits, shall call for the records, shall hear the parties and decide the same in accordance with law, without being prejudiced by the order of the Collector. This writ application is accordingly disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. Pradeep/ ( J. N. Singh,J.)