IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No.1217 OF 2010 IN CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No. 2168 OF 2004 WITH INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION No. 6864 OF 2010 IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No.1217 OF 2010 ============================================= 1. ANIL KUMAR MAHTO S/O SRI JAGDISH MAHTO R/O VILL.- JAHANGIRPUR, P.O. JALGAMA, P.S. SINGHIA, DISTT.- SAMASTIPUR 2. TRILOK ROY S/O LATE NANHAK ROY R/O VILL.- AMAW, P.O. BANIYAPUR, DISTT.- SARAN AT CHAPRA 3. ANIL KUMAR SINGH S/O SRI PRADYUMNA PRASAD SINGH R/O VILL. AND P.O. SARAIYA, P.S. BIRAHIMA BAZAR, DISTT.- MUZAFFARPUR 4. SHIVDEO SINGH S/O RAMJAPIT SINGH R/O VILL. AND P.O. BASUDEOPUR, DISTT.- SAMASTIPUR Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DIRECTOR, AGRICULTURE GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, MADHUBANI, DISTT.- MADHUBANI 5. THE DEPUTY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER, MADHUBANI, DISTT.- MADHUBANI 6. THE JOINT DIRECTOR, AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT, DARBHANGA 7. THE DISTRICT AGRICULTURE OFFICER, MADHUBANI, DISTT.- MADHUBANI 8. THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (ESTABLISHMENT), MADHUBANI, DISTT.- MADHUBANI 9. DEO KUMAR SINGH S/O SIDHESHWAR SINGH R/O VILL.- MAINAPATTI, P.O. MAHESHWARA, DISTT.- MADHUBANI 10. MANOJ KUMAR MISHRA S/O BHAGIRATH MISHRA R/O VILL. AND P.O. JOKI, DISTT.- MADHUBANI 2 11. AWADHESH KUMAR CHOUDHARY S/O ARJUN CHOUDHARY R/O VILL. AND P.O. BORAHA, DISTT.- MADHUBANI 12. ARUN KUMAR SINGH S/O DEO NANDAN SINGH R/O VILL.- BAISHI, P.O. TIRHUTA, DISTT.- MADHUBANI 13. SANJEEV KUMAR SINHA S/O SRI ISHWARI PRASAD SINHA R/O VILL. AND P.O. KIRANPUR, DISTT.- MUNGER ============================================= Appearance : For the Appellants: Mr. S.B.K.MANGALAM For the Respondent Nos. 1 to 8 : Mr.S.K. Sharma, G.P. 5 For the Respondent Nos. 9 to 12: Mr. SHANTI PRATAP CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 2 18.08.2010 Re-Interlocutory Application No. 6864 of 2010:- This application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has been filed by the appellants for condonation of five days’ delay occurred in filing the Letters Patent Appeal. Learned Advocates Mr. S.K. Sharma and Mr. Shanti Pratap appear for the Respondents. They have no objection if the delay is condoned. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the delay in filing the Letters Patent Appeal is condoned. 3 Interlocutory Application stands disposed of. Re. Letters Patent Appeal No. 1217 of 2010:- The appellants-writ petitioners have preferred this Appeal under Clause-10 of the Letters Patent against the judgment and order dated 24th June, 2010 passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C.No.2168 of 2004. The appellants-writ petitioners were not parties in the earlier appeal filed by some of the unsuccessful candidates. Learned Advocate Mr. Mangalam has appeared for the appellants. He has submitted that it is an admitted fact that in the writ petition filed in the year 2000, certain unsuccessful candidates challenged the selection of Village Level Workers without impleading the successful candidates (the present appellants and some others). Few of those successful candidates maintained another writ petition in the subject matter which was disposed of with certain directions. The appellants being similarly situated, had claimed identical relief. The learned Single Judge has erred in refusing the relief on the ground that the appellants were not party to the said proceeding. Be that as it may, the selection in question was made pursuant to the advertisement published in the year 4 1993. If we entertain the present appeal, we would be reopening the selection process made pursuant to the 1993 advertisement. Besides, the selection list has already been cancelled by the Hon’ble Single Judge by the order passed in the year 2001 in C.W.J.C. No. 10076 of 2000. In the circumstances, we do not intend to exercise the extraordinary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to entertain stale claim based on 1993 advertisement. The appeal is dismissed in limine. Bibhash (R.M. Doshit, CJ) ( Jyoti Saran, J.)