IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6347 of 2009 HARENDRA KUMAR SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2. 20.05.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner claims to have been appointed as Shiksha Mitra on 28.5.2005. The appointment was contractual for 11 months coming to an end on 28.4.2006. There is no pleading much less any document on record to suggest that the contractual appointment of the petitioner was renewed for another period of 11 months which should have enabled him to acquire the status of Panchayat Shikshak in law on 1.7.2006 under Rule 20 of the Rules framed in 2006 regulating the appointment and service condition of Panchayat teachers. There is no merit in the claim of the petitioner of having acquired the status of Panchayat Shikshak when his contractual appointment itself came to an end on 28.4.2006 and the petition has been preferred in May, 2009 long after the period for which the petitioner may have had a case, if at all, for renewal for another 11 months. To that extent, there is no merit in the writ application. The next submission is for certain arrears of honorarium for this period of 11 months initially when the petitioner worked. 2 Learned counsel for the State fairly acknowledged that if the petitioner has discharged duties in between 28.5.2005 till 28.4.2006 in accordance with law, the State is obliged to pay the honorarium. The writ application is disposed with observation that arrears, if any, of honorarium be paid to the petitioner within a maximum period of eight weeks from the date of receipt and/or production of a copy of this order. AKS/ (Navin Sinha, J.)