IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14766 of 2008 SUBHASH KUMAR . Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS . ----------- 2. 13.08.2010 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State. The petitioner was an applicant for appointment on the post of Constable under Advertisement No. 1 of 2004. It is contended that he got 9 marks, but does not disclose what were the minimum marks at which the appointments were made and whether he had been discriminated by disclosing appointments of persons with lesser marks, much less the names of such persons. Learned counsel further does not dispute that after the advertisement in question more than one advertisement has been issued for appointment. Leave is then sought to represent. If the petitioner files a representation making full and complete disclosure of persons with lesser marks than him having been appointed along with their names and also explains the delay in having moved for relief then only in that event and not otherwise the authorities are required to consider his representation. The writ application stands disposed. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)