IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16688 of 2008 INDU KUMARI JHA, W/o Sri Kailash Pati Mishra, resident of village- Amdanda, P.O. – Sanhoula, District- Bhagalpur Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Secretary , Human Resources Development Department, Govt of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna 2. Director, Human Resources Development Department, Govt of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna 3. District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Bhagalpur, District- Bhagalpur 4. District Superintendent of Education , Bhagalpur, District-Bhagalpur 5. Regional Education Extension Officer, Bhagalpur, District-Bhagalpur 6. Block Education Extension Officer , Sanhaula Block, District- Bhagalpur 7. Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Amdanda, Sanhaula, District-Bhagalpur 8. Head Master of Primary School, Masudanpur, Sanhaula, District- Bhagalpur 9. Head Master, Primary School Amdanda, Sanhaula, District- Bhagalpur 10. Block Development Officer , Sanhaula, Bhagalpur, District- Bhagalpur ……………………………………….Respondents. ----------- For the petitioner: Mr. Amar Nath Banerjee, Advocate For the State : Mr. Santosh Kumar Singh, SC-22 Mr. Sahilendra Kumar Singh, J.C. to S.C.22 2. 24.02.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the state. Petitioner is claiming that she was appointed as Panchayat Shikchak in Primary School, Masudanpur. She gave her joining in the school on 18.05.2005. Thereafter, she was transferred to Primary School, Amdanda. When she came to give her joining at that school, it was not accepted. Again, she came and started to work in the primary school Masudanpur. Prayer of the petitioner is that a direction may 2 be issued to the respondents for absorption of the petitioner as Panchayat Teacher under Rule 20 of 2006 Rules. I do not find that any such direction can be issued in favour of the petitioner considering the fact that Panchayat Shikcha Mitras who were legally appointed and working on the relevant date when 2006 Rule came into force, were absorbed. The petitioner was not absorbed and she was not being paid her salary. She was not working as she was not allowed to join her duty or to sign attendance register. In the year, 2008, she has filed this writ application. Facts of the case are not such that at this delayed stage, such direction can be issued. There is no merit in this application, it cannot be entertained. This writ application is, accordingly, dismissed. AKV/ ( Mridula Mishra, J )