IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5674 of 2008 Rita Kumari, W/O Sri Keshari Nandan Thakur, r/o village+P.O.- Bangra, via Saharghat, District- Madhubani. ………… Petitioner Versus 1.The State Of Bihar 2.The Secretary, Department of Primary, Secondary and Adult Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 3.The Director, Primary Education, Bihar, Patna 4.The District Magistrate, Madhubani 5.The District Superintendent of Education, Madhubani 6.The Block Education Extension Officer, Madhwapur, District- Madhubani 7.The District Supply Officer, Madhubani 8.The Block Development Officer, Madhwapur, District- Madhubani 9.The Gram Panchayat Raj Pithwara Block, Madhwapur, District- Madhubani through its Mukhiya 10.The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj Pihwara, Block Madhwapur, District- Madhubani 11.The Panchayat Sachiv, Gram Panchayat Raj Pihwara, Block Madhwapur, District- Madhubani 12.Sri Jitendra Singh, Ex-Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj Pihwara, Block Madhwapur, District- Madhubani. ………….. Respondents ----------- 3. 21/07/2011 In this writ application, petitioner has challenged the order of the District Magistrate, Madhubani dated 19.2.2008, as contained in Annexure-9, by which her appointment as Panchayat Teacher has been cancelled. Petitioner was earlier appointed as Shiksha Mitra in 2003. She got one extension of 11 months. That period also expired in August, 2005. Thereafter, she was not given extension. She filed her complaint and at some stage it was found that she had rightly 2 not been continued. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that on account of forgery having been committed by the Mukhiya in the School records, petitioner was discontinued. Hence, petitioner filed representation for her re-engagement as Shiksha Mitra with effect from 1.9.2005, which has been rejected by the Collector by order dated 19.2.2008, as contained in Annexure-9. The fact remains that renewal of the term of Shiksha Mitra was not automatic and as a matter of right. Hence, petitioner could not claim that she ought to have been re- engaged as Shiksha Mitra with effect from 1.9.2005. After change of Rules, post of Shiksha Mitra has been converted into regular post of Panchayat Teacher and different mode of appointment has been prescribed. On account of that circumstance also, it is not possible to accept the claim of the petitioner for her re-engagement as Shiksha Mitra with effect from 1.9.2005. Though the petitioner claims that she continued in the School till 2007 and was paid her honorarium/ salary, but that will not create any right in 3 her to be re-engaged as Shiksha Mitra from retrospective date. In the circumstances, this Court does not find any error in the order passed by the District Magistrate, as contained in Annexure-9, and therefore, does not find any merit in the writ application. The same is accordingly dismissed. Pradeep/ ( J. N. Singh,J.)