IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.1316 of 2010 In (IA 1608/2010 IN CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE 10648/2009) 1. Anant Kumar Prabhat S/O Late Ram Lakhan Prasad, R/O Vill.- Milkipar, P.O. Habibpur, P.S.- Parwalpur, Distt.- Nalanda, At Present Professor In-Charge, Ayodhya Prasad Mahila College, Biharsharif, Distt.- Nalanda……………………..Appellants Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through the Secretary, Higher Education, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 2. Bihar School Examination Board (Senior Secondary) Bihar, Patna through its Secretary 3. The Director, Education, Bihar School Examination Board (Senior Secondary), Budh Marg, Patna 4. Sub Divisional Officer, Bihar Sharif, Distt.- Nalanda 5. Jitendra Kumar S/O Not Known, M.L.A., Asthawan Assembly Constituency, Distt.- Nalanda 6. Dr. Rajiv Ranjan S/O Not Known, History Department, Nalanda College, Bihar Sharif, Nalanda 7. Ramchandra Prasad S/O Not Known, Ayodhya Path, Kachchari, Bihar Sharif, Distt.- Nalanda………………………Respondents ---------------------------------- 3. 21.12.2011 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondents. The writ petitioner who is appellant before us is dissatisfied with an interim order dated 30.7.2010. By that order the Writ Court while considering the application filed on behalf of the respondents No. 5 to 7 came to conclusion that there was no need of passing any order on such application because stay order dated 7.10.2009 had already become infructuous. The relevant facts and dates have been 2 mentioned in the order under appeal which show that the direction contained in Annexure-5 to the writ petition which was stayed on 7.10.2009 had already been carried out by the authorities and the concerned parties leading to holding of the meeting on 5.9.2009 and election of the President and the Secretary of the governing body on 23.9.2009. In our considered view, the effect of the order under appeal is clear that stay was obtained on 7.10.2009 by the writ petitioner without disclosing the full and correct facts. Such stay was of no significance, when the direction in Annexure-5 had already been carried out. We find no merit in this appeal. It is, accordingly, dismissed. Mkc/ (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (Shivaji Pandey, J.)