IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16704 of 2009 1. GOPAL SHARAN CHAUDHARY S/O SHRI MANKI CHAUDHARY R/O VILL.- MIRCHAK, P.S. GURUA, DISTT.- GAYA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE COMMISSIONER, MAGADH DIVISION, GAYA 3. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, GAYA 4. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER SHERGHATI, DISTT.- GAYA 5. THE DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER, GAYA 6. THE BLOCK SUPPLY OFFICER, GURUA, DISTT.- GAYA ----------- 2. 29.11.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Learned counsel submits that the appeal against cancellation of the licence has been dismissed ex-parte. The order sheet of Appeal Case No. 115 of 2008 reflects that the petitioner himself absented on four consecutive dates fixed in the appeal before it was dismissed. The procedures of law, including remedies of appeal, are available to those who are vigilant for the protection of their rights and not to the indolent and those who are negligent in the protection of their own rights and interest. There is no plausible explanation furnished to the satisfaction of the Court in the writ application. The jurisdiction under Article 226 being discretionary in nature, from the conduct of the appellant himself, this Court is satisfied that it finds no reason to interfere with the dismissal of the appeal for lack of deligence on part of the petitioner himself. The application is dismissed. P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)