IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10474 of 2011 Bihar Rajya Ardh Sarkari Nikay Padadhikari Sangh A Regtd. Organization Under Trade Union Act 1926, Shiv Colony, Raja Bazar, Patna-800014 Thru Its President Abhimanu Prasad Verma S/O Late Bishnu Prasad Verma R/O Vivekanand Park, P.S.- Patliputra, Distt.- Patna-13 ….. Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through Chief Secretary, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 2. The Chief Secretary, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 3. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Energy, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 4. Mr. Ashok Kumar Pandey, M.D., Bihar State Hydroelectric Power Corporation, Sone Bhawan, 2nd Floor, Birchand Patel Marg, Patna-1 ….. Respondents ---------------------------------- 05. 19.10.2011 The present Appeal has been filed by the petitioner against dismissal on the ground that the appointment letter of the Managing Director of Bihar State Hydro Electric Power Corporation has been issued only under the signature of Joint Secretary to the Government of Bihar, Department of Energy vide Memo No. AD2/Jal vi.nip.14/2008 dated 28.2.2011. Learned counsel for the petitioner has emphasized his submission on the particular averments referring to paragraph-18 of the counter affidavit in support of the writ petition in which it has stated that the respondent no.4 has been appointed in pursuance to the Interview taken by the Board headed by Development Commissioner and thereafter the respondent was appointed vide Notification No.8 dated 28.2.2011 as per order of His 2 Excellency, the Governor of Bihar which has issued by Joint Secretary to the Government in the Department of Energy. In view of query from this Court the petitioner is not able to substantiate his contention that the memo did not contain ascent of the Governor. Taking note of the submission made in paragraph-7 of the counter affidavit, that appointment was not in consonance with the order passed by this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 3196 of 1995, Annexure-5, dated 21st December, 1995 filed by one Shiv Kumar but however, it has to be observed that if that be so, it is for the petitioner in the said writ petitioner to raise his grievance, but the present petitioner cannot make a grievance over the non- compliance of the order passed in Civil Review No. 9596 of 1995 as they are not aggrieved party in the said writ petition. Under the above circumstances, we are of the opinion that this P.I.L. itself is not maintainable. Accordingly, this writ application is dismissed with no costs. P.K. (T. Meena Kumari, J.) (Vikash Jain, J.)