- (1.) The appellant was appointed as a Shiksha Mitra in 2006 and continued to work until 2009 in the Basic Primary School, Barahar, Block Bidhuna, District Auraiya. In 2009, a first information report was registered against the appellant as Case Crime No 109 of 2009 under Sections 302 and 307 of the Penal Code read with Sections 147, 148 and 149. On 22 November 2012, the appellant was acquitted by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Auraiya. According to the appellant, he thereafter approached the Village Education Committee and a proposal was made in his favour by the Head Master and Secretary. A recommendation was made to the District Basic Education Officer on 20 February 2013. The appellant thereupon represented his case. The second respondent informed the District Basic Education Officer on 26 July 2013 that by a Government Order dated 2 June 2010, the appointment of Shiksha Mitras had been discontinued. Aggrieved, the appellant moved a writ petition which was dismissed by the impugned judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated 1 September 2014.
(2.) The basic appointment of a Shiksha Mitra was of a contractual nature. The nature of appointment was elucidated in the judgment of a Full Bench of this Court in Km Sandhya Singh Vs State of U P,, 2013 7 ADJ 1 where it was held as follows: "It could not be disputed by the petitioners that the scheme for appointment of Shiksha Mitra came into being through the government orders i.e. executive instructions. To put it differently, the petitioners' appointment/selection is contractual appointment as Shiksha Mitra. Meaning thereby, there is no statutory backing to the petitioners' claim. The petitioners' argument proceeds on the footing that the post of Shiksha Mitra is a civil post and is governed by the Principle of statutory service rules. The scheme itself provides that a person shall be allowed to function as Shiksha Mitra under a contract for a fixed period which will come to an end on 31st of May of the next year. No honorarium shall be payable for the month of June. The scheme shows that it will commence in the month of July of each year and will end on 31st of May i.e. for eleven months. By modification it has been provided that if nothing is there against a person he may continue as Shiksha Mitra for the next academic session, subject to receiving a short refresher training. All this cumulatively shows that the tenure of Shiksha Mitra is a fixed term tenure, maximum up to the period of eleven months which, of course, in view of the subsequent amendments by the Government Order can be renewed for subsequent academic sessions. Having noticed the nature of working of Shiksha Mitra as envisaged in the government orders, to which there appears to be no quarrel by the petitioners, if the government has decided to discontinue the scheme any further by the government order dated 2nd of June, 2010, the petitioners have hardly any right for the enforcement of which a writ under Article 226 of the Constitution of India can be issued."
(3.) After the enforcement of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, the State Government took a policy decision on 2 June 2010 to discontinue fresh appointments of Shiksha Mitras. The learned Single Judge, in view of the decision of the Full Bench, held that no fresh appointment could be made to the post of Shiksha Mitra and dismissed the writ petition, leaving it open to the appellant to pursue such remedy as is available in law.;