IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4865 of 2007 Ganesh Singh @ Ganesh Yadav, son of Kanhaiya Singh @ Kanhaiya Yadav, Resident of Village Chuyan, Post Office Umapur, P.S. Bhagwanpur, Distt. Kaimur (Bhabua). -------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar, through the Secretary, Primary Adult Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. The District Magistrate-cum-Chairman, Sarv Siksha Abhiyan, Kaimur (Bhabua). 3. The Deputy Development Commissioner cum Vice Chairman, Sarv Siksha Abhiyan, Kaimur (Bhabua). 4. The District Superintendent of Education-cum-District Programme Co-ordinate, Sarv Siksha Abhiyan Kaimur (Bhabua). 5. The Block Education Extension Officer-cum-Block Programme Co- ordinator, Sarv Siksha Abhiyan, Bhagwanpur/Rampur, Kaimur (Bhabua). 6. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Ramgarh, Block and P.S. Bhagwanpur, District Kaimur (Bhabua). 7. The Panchayat Sevak cum Secretary of the Gram Panchayat, Ramgarh, Block and P.S. Bhagwanpur, Distt. Kaimur (Bhabua). 8. The President, Gram Siksha Samiti, Ramgarh, P.S. Bhagwanpur, Distt. Kaimur (Bhabua). ------ Respondents ----------- 2 26.10.2010 Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State as with regard to the following relief:- “1. That this is an application for issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/ order(s)/direction(s), quashing the order contained in letter no. 854 dated 22.11.2006 issued by Respondent No.4, whereby and whereunder the petitioner claim to be appointed as Panchayat Siksha Mitra has been rejected. The petitioner further pryas for directing the respondents to appoint the petitioner as Panchayat Siksha Mitra as he has requisite 2 qualification to be appointed as such according to panchayat Siksha Mitra Employment Scheme.” this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner, though was an applicant for the post of Shiksha Mitra but, the ultimate appointment could not be made, inasmuch as, there is nothing on record to show that there was an agreement of 11 months necessary for the appointment on the post of Shiksha Mitra. In that view of the matter, the impugned order, holding that the petitioner’s selection could not have been made on the post of Shiksha Mitra, inasmuch as, he was not the original resident of the Panchayat, in question, can have now little relevance, inasmuch as, now the post of Shiksha Mitra stands abolished with effect from 1.7.2006. The petitioner’s grievance is, therefore, out and out for appointment on the post which has already been abolished and, accordingly, this writ application is wholly misconceived and the same is hereby dismissed. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)