IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5800 of 2007 Anita Devi alias Anita Kumari, Daughter of Sukhdeo Prasad, W/o Raj Kumar Prasad, Resident of Village Nandpur, P.S. Motihari (Moffasil), District East Champaran. ------ Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Commissioner cum Secretary, Human Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. Director, Panchayati Raj, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur. 5. District Magistrate, East Champaran at Motihari. 6. District Panchayati Raj Officer, East Champaran at Motihari. 7. District Superintendent of Education, East Champaran (Motihari). 8. Sub Divisional Officer, East Champaran (Motihari), Sadar. 9. Block Development Officer, Motihari. 10. Block Education Extension Officer, Motihari, District East Champaran (Motihari). 11. Mukhiya, Uttari Dhekha Panchayat, Motihari. 12. Panchayat Secretary, Uttari Dhekha Panchayat, Motihari. 13. Saroj Sinha, wife of Moti Lal Prasad, R/o Village Nandpur, P.S. Motihari (M), District East Champaran(Motihari). ------- Respondents ----------- 2 27.10.2010 Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State as with regard to the following relief:- “1(i) To issue an appropriate writ order or direction commanding the respndents to appoint the petitioner on the post of Siksha Mitra in Uttari Dhekaha Panchayat under Motihari Block in the District of East Champaran after selection in terms and direction issued by the District Panchayat Raj Officer vide memo no. 64 dated 14.1.2006. (ii) To issue a further writ order or direction commanding the 2 respondents to cancel the appointment of respondent no.13 who is admittedly a lesser qualified candidate then the petitioner. (iii) This Hon’ble Court may further adjudicate and hold that the selection of the respondent no.13 on the post of Siksha Mitra in the Uttari Dhekha Panchayat is abinitio void, illegal and against the provisions of law.” this Court is of the opinion that even when the petitioner cannot be appointed on the post of Shiksha Mitra after abolition of the said post with effect from 1.7.2006, her grievance as with regard to the illegality in the selection and appointment of respondent no.13 on the post of Shiksha Mitra can still be looked into by the concerned District Teachers Appellate Authority in view of the fact that she has now been absorbed on the post of Panchayat Shikshak in view of 2006 Rules. That being so, the petitioner is given liberty to move the said appellate authority for assailing the selection and appointment of the respondent no.13 and in the event such a complaint is filed by the petitioner, the 3 same shall be dealt and decided by the said appellate authority strictly in accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as also respondent no.13. With the aforementioned observations and liberty, this application is disposed of. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)