IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.1678 of 2011 In Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No. 1281 of 2011 ====================================================== Vindeshwar Rajak, S/o Sri Darogi Razak, R/o Village- Dehuli, P.S.- Sakra, District- Muzaffarpur, at present posted as working as Head Clerk, Building Division, Darbhanga, District- Darbhanga. .... Appellant/Appellant Versus 1. The State of Bihar, through Sudhir Kr. S/o not known. 2. Sudhir Kumar, S/o not known Secretary, Building Construction Deptt., P.W.D., New Secretariat, Patna, Bihar. 3. Gopal Krishna, S/o not known, Engineer-In-Chief-Cum-Special Secretary, null Building Construction Deptt., P.W.D., Patna. 4. Jairam Rajak, S/o not known, Chief Engineer, Building Construction Deptt., P.W.D., North Wing New Secretariat, Patna, Bihar. 5. Awadh Kishore, S/o not known, Executive Engineer Building Construction Division, Darbhanga Circle, Darbhanga. 6. Sunil Kumar, S/o not known, Superintending Engineer, Building Construction Deptt., Building Circle, Darbhanga. .... Respondents/Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant : Mr. Md. Shahnawaz Ali, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Madhuresh Prasad, G.P.-12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 2 20-12-2011 Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 10th August 2011 made by the learned single Judge in MJC No. 1281 of 2011 (contempt petition), the applicant has preferred this Appeal under Patna High Court LPA No.1678 of 2011 (2) dt.20-12-2011 2 Clause 10 of the Letters Patent. It appears that to avoid dismissal of the writ petition on the ground of delay and laches, the appellant withdrew the writ petition with a view to making a representation. As the representation was not decided within the time specified by the learned single Judge the appellant made application under the Contempt of Courts Act. The same has been rejected by the learned single Judge. We are of the opinion that against the impugned order Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent shall not lie as the impugned order cannot be held to be a judgment within the meaning of Clause 10 of the Letters Patent. Appeal is dismissed in limine. Devendra/- (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)