IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9682 of 2005 HARE RAM PRASAD S/O Sri Deo Sah, resident of village Torna, P.O. Torni, P.S. Shiv Sagar District Rohtas. Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Chief Secretary Govt. of Bihar Patna. 2.The Director General of Police, Bihar patna. 3.D.I.G. of Police (human Rights) Bihar Patna. 4.D.I.G. of police, Magadh Range, Gaya. 5. S.P. Aurangabad. ----------- 2 8/12/2009 No one appears for the petitioner. Counsel for the State is present. Prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows:- “That this is an application for issuance of an appropriate writ order or direction commanding the respondent to appoint the petitioner on lthe post of constable in the district of Aurangabad as the petitioner had been successful in all the test taken for appointment and in remeasurement by the D.I.G. Gaya the petitioners height has been found to be 173.5 cm and also that a candidate having of 173.4 cm in the category of the petitioner has been appointed so not appointing the petitioner by the authorities will be highly illegal, arbitrary, malafide and discriminatory and for a further direction to the respondents to make an enquiry/verification regarding the photograph and other documents i.e,. regarding the genuineness of the candidature of the petitioner by an officer not less than the rank of Dy. S.P. if required but the same may be done within a reasonable time and then if the candidature and other testimonials of the petitioners are fond to be true then to appoint him or for any other order or orders which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper under the 2 circumstances of the case.” From reading of the writ application specially Clause 18 of the advertisement as contained in Annexure- 1, it is more than clear that the petitioner did not follow the prescribed procedure, inasmuch as, there is no averment in the writ application that when his height of the petitioner was measured as 173.5 cm he had raised any objection before the Chairman of the Board on the same day and/or filed his appeal before the D.I.G.. That being so, if the petitioner did not follow the prescribed procedure with regard to the advertisement of the year 1998, the selection undertaken in the month of February, 2001 can not be reopened now in the year 2009. This writ application by efflux of time infact has become infructuous and is accordingly dismissed. Abhay Kumar (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)