IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.617 of 2010 1. BHUPENDRA NARAYAN SINHA @ BHUPENDRA PRASAD SINHA, S/O LATE RAM CHANDRA PRASAD @ RAM CHANDRA PRASAD SINHA R/O VILLAGE NAYAGAON, P.O - JAMALPUR, P.S - EAST COLONY, DISTRICT - MUNGER, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT MOHALLA- NAKKI NAGAR, KAYASTH TOLA, P.S - JAMALPUR, DISTRICT- MUNGER. ------------- Petitioner/Appellant Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, BANKA. 3. THE ESTABLISHMENT DEPUTY COLLECTOR,BANKA. --------------Respondents/Respondents ----------- For the Appellant :- Mr. Prashant Sinha, Adv. For the State :- Mr. Birendra Kumar, A.C. to G.P. No. XIV ----------- 2 05.04.2010 I.A. No. 3152 of 2010 This is an application for condonation of delay of 8 days. We have heard Mr. Prashant Sinha, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Birendra Kumar, counsel for the State. Mr. Kumar has no objection for condonation of delay. Accordingly, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned and I.A. No. 3152 of 2010 is disposed of. LPA No. 617 of 2010 As we have condoned the delay in preferring the appeal, we are inclined to take up the appeal for admission 2 and final disposal. In this intra-court appeal, the assail is to the order dated 4.2.2010 passed by learned single Judge in C.W.J.C. No. 17161 of 2009. The District Magistrate, Banka had issued an advertisement on 24.4.1998. The appellant who was working as a daily wager at Munger from 1.5.1979 to 30.11.1981 was aggrieved as his certificate to that extent was not sent to the District Magistrate, Banka. Because of the said situation, he approached this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 924 of 1999 and this court directed to send the report to District Magistrate, Munger within two months. It was further mentioned by the writ court that consequent upon the verification report, if the appellant petitioner was entitled to further relief then such reliefs would be given to him by the respondents. It is not in doubt that the working period was verified and a certificate was issued to the District Magistrate, Banka. As no order of appointment was issued in favour of the appellant petitioner, he submitted a representation which was dealt upon by Collector, Banka who directed that he may apply for the post of class-IV employee in the district 3 of Banka or any other district but his claim for working more than 240 days in Munger district cannot be given weightage in the district of Banka. The said order came to be passed on 24.11.2004. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the appellant writ petitioner preferred CWJC No. 3804 of 2005. The learned single Judge quashed the order passed by District Magistrate, Banka and directed him to consider the case of the appellant for appointment on class- IV posts taking into account his work experience earned at Munger. Thereafter the District Magistrate, Banka in the year 2007 passed an order that the advertisement that was issued in the year 1998 was abandoned and nothing finally ensued on the basis of said advertisement. The said order was passed on 17.4.2007. Being dissatisfied with the same, the appellant preferred CWJC No. 17161 of 2009, whereby, learned single Judge by the impugned order has opined that when the 1998 advertisement never culminated finality and no appointment order was issued in favour of any person, no case was made out for interference. 4 Regard being had to the factual chronology, we are of the considered opinion, the appellant cannot claim a right on the basis of advertisement of the year 1998 when no panel was prepared and no one was appointed. Hence the appeal being devoid of any merit stands dismissed without any order as to costs. Rishi (Dipak Misra, CJ.) (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)