IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5327 of 2009 SHASHI RANJAN THAKUR Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2. 27.04.2009 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State. The petitioner claims that he was appointed as a Shiksha Mitra on 10.5.2005. In the normal course his tenure of 11 months would have come to an end on 10.4.2006. The writ petition has been filed long thereafter on 24.4.2009. Annexure 12, the impugned order of removal, refers to termination of the petitioner on 30.5.2005.There is no pleading in the writ application challenging this recitals in the impugned order. A supplementary affidavit filed today states that the petitioner was never removed. What should be pleaded in the main writ petition is coming in the form of supplementary affidavit. Additionally, there is no material on record to suggest that the services of the petitioner were renewed after 10.4.2006 assuming for the sake of argument that his serves were not terminated on 30.5.2005. Only in that event would he acquire the status of Panchayat Teacher on 1.7.2006 under Rule 20 of the Rules framed in 2006 for appointment of Primary Teachers. The impugned order dated 9.4.2009 states that the petitioner was permitted by the Block Development Officer to rejoin duties on 6.4.2007. Whether it be his termination order dated 30.5.2005 or the absence of any renewal after 10.4.2006, prima facie it appears to this Court that there was no occasion for the petitioner to be brought back in service on 6.4.2007 unless there was a renewal of the contract. These are factual matters to be decided by the authorities based on verification of the original records. Annexure 13 to the supplementary affidavit filed today states that the matters relating to appointment of Shiksha Mitra between 2003 to 2005 were to be adjudicated by the District Magistrate and not by the Appellate Authority. Without making any pronouncement on the merits of the issue, since no counter affidavit is available on the record and this Court is satisfied of the need for verification of the claim from the original records, the application is disposed off with the observation that if the petitioner files a representation before the District Magistrate, Samastipur the same is expected to be considered and disposed of in accordance with law in light of discussions aforesaid. If the District Magistrate finds on facts that the petitioner was validity holding the status of Shiksha Mitra and was working on 1.7.2006, when he is deemed to have acquired the status of Panchayat Shikshak, the District Magistrate is expected to pass necessary consequential orders without requiring to have the petitioner move the Court again. Let the District Magistrate dispose of the matter by a reasoned and speaking order within a maximum period of three months from the date of receipt and/or production of a copy of this order. The writ application stands disposed off. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)