IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5396 of 2009 SANTOSH KUMAR Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2. 28.04.2009 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State. The claim is for reinstatement as a Panchayat Teacher. On the own showing of the petitioner his appointment as a Shiksha Mitra consequent to the third renewal expired in February 2006. He therefore does not get the benefit of acquisition of status of Panchayat Teacher with effect from 1.7.2006 under Rule 20 of the Appointment Rules framed in 2006. Learned Counsel is unable to demonstrate any legal provision providing for a fourth extension of the contractual appointment of a Panchayat Shiksha Mitra. Learned Counsel for the State from Annexure 8 points out that there is no provision for the fourth renewal of the contract for eleven months as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra. There is no merit in this application. It is accordingly dismissed. Notwithstanding the dismissal of the writ application if the petitioner has worked for any period as Shiksha Mitra and there is no legal impediment under the Rules for the salary the authorities are required to consider any such representation filed by the petitioner and dispose if in accordance with law. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)