IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14587 of 2007 1. Shabbir Ahmad, Son of Abdul Majid, Resident of Village- Baradhant, P.O. Gehuma Bairiya. 2. Nikhat Perwin, Wife of Majide Ajam, Resident of Village- Balbakhar, P.O.-Gehuma Bairiya, Both of P.S. Phulparas, District-Madhubani. ….Petitioners. Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Secretary, Primary and Adult Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3. District Magistrate, Patna. 4. District Magistrate-cum-Chairman, Sarv Shiksha Abhiyan, Madhubani. 5. District Superintendent of Education-cum-Coordinator, Sarv Shiksha Abhiyan, Madhubani. 6. District Panchayat Raj Officer, Madhubani. 7. Distict Development Commissioner, Madhubani. 8. Executive Magistrate, Madhubani. 9. Block Development Officer, Phulparas, District-Madhubani. 10. Block Education Extension Officer, Phulparas, District-Madhubani. 11. Mukhiya Gehuma Bairiya Gram Panchayat, Block Phulparas District-Madhubani. 12. Gram Sewak-cum-Secretary, Sarv Shiksha Abhiyan Gehuma Baria Gram Panchayat, Block Phulparas, District-Madhubani. 13. Sukh Subidha Committee, Gehuma Bairia Gram Panchayat, Block Phulparas, District-Madhubani. 14. Chairman Sukh Subidha Committee, Gehuma Bairia Gram Panchayat, Block Phulparas, District-Madhubani. 15. Md. Parwej Alam, S/o Khudabaksh Mansuri, Resident of Village- Bala Bakhar. 16. Gaitri Kumari, Wife of Brahamadeo Yadav, Resident of Village- Bairia. 17. Poonam Kumar, Wife of Bindeshwar Kunwar, Resident of Village- Belha. 18. Tila Devi, Wife of Rajedo Yadav, Resident of Village-Gehuma. 19. Mamta Kumar, Wife of Sunil Kumar Resident of Village- Balabakhar. 20. Renu Kumari Wife of Indradeo Kamat, Resident of Village- Gehuma. All of P.S. Phulparas, District-Madhubani. …Respondents. ----------- - 2 - 02. 06.03.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioners and counsel appearing for the State. Prayer of the petitioners is to quash the appointment of respondents no. 15 to 20, who were appointed on the post of Shiksha Mitra in the year 2005 and to appoint the petitioners against the posts on which private respondents 15 to 20 were appointed. Prayer of the petitioner can not be entertained at this stage when the post of Pancahyat Shiksha Mitra is no more existing. Panchayat Shiksha Mitra’s post became non- existent after coming into force of Bihar Panchayat Primary Teachers (Appointment, Service Condition) Rule 2006. Rule 20 of 2006 Rules provides that Panchayat Shiksha Mitra who were still working on the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra on 01.07.2006 will be deemed to have been absorbed as Panchayat Teacher. Under this very Rule, it is also provided that all relevant orders, circulars, guidelines, notifications on the basis of which appointments were earlier made on the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra, is deemed to be superseded. Pleadings in the Writ application makes it clear that cause of action arose to the petitioner just - 3 - after the appointment of Private Respondents. Petitioners should have approach the High Court, under its writ jurisdiction for grant of such appointments. Now when entire scenario has changed, rule is amended and the post has become non-existent, no such direction can be issued to any authority. However if the petitioner is still interested, may represent his case before the District Level Tribunal constituted under 2008 rules. It depends upon the tribunal to consider the propriety of entertaining such objections and taking any further action in this regard only after being satisfied regarding its propriety the matter can be open. This application is disposed of. Vikash/- (Mridula Mishra, J.)