IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1472 of 2011 POONAM KUMARI, D/O SRI SAKALDEEP RAI, R/O VILLAGE AND P.O.-PANAPUR LONGA, BLOCK- HAJIPUR, P.S.-SADAR HAZIPUR, DISTRICT- VAISHALI. …………PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. 3. THE DIRECTOR, PRIMARY EDUCATION, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 4. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, VAISHALI, HAZIPUR. 5. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, VAISHALI, HAZIPUR. 6. THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER, HAZIPUR. 7. THE MUKHIYA GRAM PANCHAAYT RAJ PANAPUR LANGA, ANCHAL-HAZIPUR. 8. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, RAJ PANAPUR LANGA ANCHAL-HAZIPUR. …………RESPONDENTS. ----------- 3 27.09.2011 In this writ application petitioner has challenged on order of the Appellate Authority dated 01.10.2010, as contained in Annexure-9, by which the appeal of the petitioner, filed pursuant to liberty granted by this Court in her writ application, has been rejected on the ground that even if the appointment of the person appointed in 2003 as Siksha Mitra is cancelled the petitioner could not be appointed as there was a ban by the Department for any fresh appointment in the capacity of Shiksha Mitra after 2006 Rules came into force. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner does not seek her appointment as 2 Shiksha Mitra with effect from 2003, rather she seeks her fresh appointment against resulted vacancy arising on account of cancellation of appointment of the said holder of the post. This Court is unable to accept the said stand of the petitioner. Even if the vacancy became available on account of cancellation of any appointee as Shiksha Mitra made in 2003 on the ground that he had obtained his appointment on forged certificate neither petitioner could be appointed against that vacancy with retrospective effect on notional basis nor she could be appointed afresh against that vacancy de- horse the provisions of 2006 Rules. If the vacancy became available the same has obviously to be filled up in accordance with the procedure laid down in the Rules. Therefore this Court does not find any error in the order of the Appellate Authority. The writ application is dismissed. Arvind/ ( J.N. Singh, J.)