IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.17228 of 2010 RAM KAILASH SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2. 11.05.2011 Whatever may be the background for the dispute or the reason for not renewing the contract of the petitioner on the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra at the relevant time, the fact is that the petitioner’s contract was never extended after the second contract. In view of the same petitioner could never continue as Panchayat Shikshak and could not be given benefit under the deemed provision of the 2006 Rules as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra after 2006 Rules came into play. If that is the status and also the fact that the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra has been abolished from 1.7.06, the dispute raised by the petitioner for a direction to renew his contract and permit him to continue as a Panchayat Shiksha Mitra is a academic kind of submission. It does not merit any consideration in the changed circumstances. Petitioner has lost his right for consideration on the post which is not in existence. The writ petition is dismissed. Namita ( Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)