Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:80261 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 36071 of 2008 Petitioner :- Smt. Raj Kumari Singh Patel Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Shiksha Nideshak Basic And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Satish Mandhyan,Prashant Kumar Tripathi,Sarvodaya Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Chandra Narayan Tripathi,Smt. Archana Singh,V.K. Singh Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J. 1. This writ petition is pending since 2008. None appeared on behalf of petitioner. Mrs. Shruti Malviya, learned Standing Counsel is present for State-Respondents. 2. This writ petition was earlier disposed of by order dated 01.10.2008, which is reproduced hereinafter: “Petitioner was selected as Shiksha Mitra and appoint for the year 2001-02. His selection was recommended by the Village Education Committee and the selection of the petitioner was approved by the District Level Committee thereafter petitioner attended the training and after completion 30 days training he has joined Prathamik Vidyalaya, Bansipur on 02.02.2002, he continued as Shiksha Mitra 15 days refresher training programme for each successive years. After election in August, 2005 one Aziz Ahmad Siddiqui was elected as Gram Pradhan and Head of the Village Education Committee initiated proceedings for selection of Shiksha Mitra for the session 2006-07. Vide resolution dated 28.11.2006 petitioner removed from the post of Siksha Mitra. Petitioner represented before the District Magistrate vide her representation dated 12.07.2007 iner-alia that she made scape goat of village politics. Thereafter the Village Education Committee vide its resolution dated 15.09.2007 permitted the petitioner to continue as Shiksha Mitra in the institution. Aggrieved respondent no. 7 filed a complaint thereafter it appears that writ petition was filed in which the Court had issued notice to respondent no. 7 i.e. petitioner. The aforesaid writ petition was disposed of directing the District Magistrate to decide the representation of respondent nos. 6 & 7 after giving them full opportunity. Thereafter the District Magistrate, Allahabad has cancelled approval in favour of the petitioner as Shiksha Mitra while deciding the representation filed by respondent nos. 6 & 7. The District Magistrate is empowered to decide all the complaints regarding selection of Shiksha Mitra under the Government Order dated 2nd May, 2006. The services of the Shiksha Mitra are contractual in nature. They are paid honorarium. Salary is not paid by the Government and they are not the Government servants, hence the writ petition is not maintainable. The petitioner has an alternative and efficacious remedy before the Civil Court by filing a Civil Suit. However, considering all the facts and circumstances of the case this petition is finally disposed of on the ground that petitioner has an alternative and efficacious remedy before the Civil Court by filing a Civil Suit.” 3. Aforesaid order was challenged by petitioner before a Division Bench of this Court by way of filing Special Appeal No. 391 of 2013 which was disposed of vide order dated 27.01.2020 whereby above referred order was set aside and matter was remitted back for adjudication on merit. 4. In the present case petitioner was selected as Shiksha Mitra in the year 2001-02 and approval was cancelled vide order dated 03/04.07.2008 by District Magistrate on basis of a direction passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 58421 of 2007. 5. So far as petitioner is concerned, there were allegations that she used to have quarrel with other employees and also demanded money from students of School. 6. In impugned order, details of contents of affidavit submitted by petitioner was also recorded where she in fact has admitted her guilt and also undertake to deposit money extracted or demanded from students. 7. Learned Standing Counsel submits that in writ petition there is no specific averment so far above referred allegations and acceptance of guilt is concerned. 8. In aforesaid circumstances, this Court of the view that a person who has extracted or demanded money from students is not entitled to continue as Shiksha Mitra, a contractual appointment. 9. This writ petition was filed in the year 2008 and no interim order was passed and later on it was disposed of vide order dated 01.10.2008. Therefore, after a period of more than 17 years claim of petitioner cannot be considered even if the allegations, referred above, are ignored. 10. Otherwise also, impugned order is a reasoned order as well as that principle of natural justice has been substantially complied with, therefore, no interference is called. 11. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 15.5.2025 AK Digitally signed by :- AWADESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad