Hon’ble H.L. Gokhale, C.J.—Heard Smt. Anita Tripathi, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant and Sri Ravi Pratap, learned Counsel appearing for the contesting respondent No. 7.

2. The facts of this matter show that a good scheme of Shiksha Mitra is derailed because of litigation and the orders passed by the Government officials. This is a case where the appointment was to be made for the academic year 2005-06 in a village in district Basti. The advertisement itself was however given at the end of the academic year on 8th April, 2006. This selection procedure went on thereafter until 26th November, 2006 and the appellant claims to have joined on 7.2.2007. But by a stay order the appellant was again out of job after a couple of days. The consequence is that thereafter there has been no teacher at all working as Shiksha Mitra in the institution. There have been orders by the District Magistrate and then by the Courts also.

3. Everybody is forgetting that the scheme of Shiksha Mitra is to spread education and it is not a scheme for employment. What is being given is an honorarium to the concerned teacher. The appointment comes to an end at the end of the academic year, wit