P. B. Bajanthri, J.—The appellant has preferred this appeal in challenging the order dated 10.05.2019 in CWJC No.10606 of 2019 by which the Hon’ble Single Judge (Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mohit Kumar Shah) dismissed the writ petition holding that in view of the Full Bench decision in Kalpana Rani Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. reported in 2014 (2) PLJR 665 as also since the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra already abolished with effect from 01.07.2006, no one can be appointed on the said post in terms of Bihar Panchayat Elementary Teachers (Employment and Service) Rules, 2006.

2. The matrix of facts giving rise to the present appeal is/are a follows.

3. The appellant passed his matriculation exam from Bihar School Examination Board Patna (henceforth for short ‘the Board’), securing 509 marks out of 700 (Ist Division) and in terms of the Government Resolution No.1079 dated 20.06.2002 issued by the Primary and Adult Education Department, Bihar, Patna (henceforth for short ‘the Department’), applied for his selection in the year 2005 in Gram Panchayat Raj, Purushottimpur, Block-Lahladpur, District-Saran.

4. In the said selection process, one Rajesh Kumar Pandey and others were selected. In the meantime, the Bihar Panchayat Elementary Teachers (Employment and Service) Rules, 2006 came into existence by which the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra was abolished with effect from 01.07.2006 and newly created post of Panchayat Shikshak came into existence.

5. The appellant-petitioner in his own averments in the writ petition, woke up from deep slumber in the year 2015 by seeking information under RTI Act on 17.06.2015. Later he came to know that those appointed (Rajesh Kumar Pandey & Ors.) had secured lesser marks than him and accordingly he started pursuing his judicial remedy.

6. He approached the District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority, Saran (henceforth for short ‘the Authority’) by filing Appeal No.2017 and it was dismissed on 26.09.2018 on the ground that it has no jurisdiction relating to non-existant of Panchayat Shiksha Mitras Post.

7. The appellant-petitioner challenged the same before the learned State Appellate Authority which too came to be dismissed on 27.02.2019 in Appeal No.689/2018 on the ground that in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble High Court in case of Kalpana Rani (supra), the authorities cannot entertain the said appeal.

8. Still aggrieved, the writ petition was filed vide C.W.J.C. No.10606 of 2019. The Hon’ble Single Judge took up the matter on 10.05.2019 and after hearing the parties held as follows:—

“3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and I find that the present case in hand, is squarely covered by the Full Bench decision rendered in the case of Kalpana Rani (supra), paragraphs no. 26, 30, 106, 114 and 118, whereof are reproduced hereinbelow :—

“26. In the matter before us also the appellant Kalpana Rani was never appointed as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra either in 2003 or at any time until 1st July, 2006. After 1st July, 2006, the appellant could not set up right to employment as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra or right to be absorbhed as Panchayat Teacher. The belated challenge to the appointment of the respondent nos. 9 and 10 and the claim for absorption as Panchayat Teacher raised by the appellate after 1st July, 2006 was clearly an afterthought. Such a claim cannot be entertained. Irrespective of the validity of the appointment of respondent nos. 9 and 10 as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra, the appellant has no right to be appointed as Panchayat Shiksha Mitra or to be absorbed as Panchayat Teacher.

30. For the aforesaid reasons, Appeal is dismissed with cost. The cost is quantified at Rs. 10,000/-. The amount of cost will be deposited in the Government Treasury at Samastipur within eight weeks from today. In the event, the appellant fails to deposit the amount of cost as directed, the District Collector, Samastipur will recover the same as arrears of land revenue. Interim relief stands vacated.

106. A question