IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11101 of 2005 RAM SEWAK SINGH, Son of Late Bihari Singh, resident of Village- Soni, P.O. Khairadip, P.S. Daudnagar, District- Aurangabad (Bihar) -------------Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Director, Secondary Education, Bihar, Amrapali Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna. 3. Vidyalaya Seva Board, Bihar Biscoman Bhawan, Ist Floor, South Gandhi Maidan, Patna through its Secretary. 4. The Secretary, Vidyalaya Seva Board, Bihar, Biscomaun Bhawan, Ist Floor, South Gandhi Maidan, Patna. -----------Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner:- Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Mishra, Advocate Counsel for the State:- Mr. Alok Kumar A.C. to G.A. 1 Counsel for Respondent nos. 3 & 4 Vipin Kumar, Advocate 3. 21.01.2011 The petitioner is seeking appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher in Hindi. The advertisement was made two decades ago in the year 1991. The Bihar Vidyalaya Sewa Board, Patna declared a list of successful candidates. Later a supplementary list was also issued by the Board, which purportedly indicated the petitioners roll number. The entire list was set aside by the State Government, as there were several anomaly’s in the list which in fact has been pointed out in the order passed in C.W.J.C. No. 3494 of 1998 disposed of on 24.9.1999. After the anomalies were removed the Board was directed to prepare a fresh list, accordingly a fresh list was prepared after re-examining the testimonials etc. of the candidates. After the Board had reconsidered 2 the matter a fresh list was prepared which was challenged by filing a writ application. This writ has been filed challenging the aforesaid list. The petitioner had not come to this Court at that stage. The order of this Court is contained in Annexure-3 wherein this Court had held that the fresh list prepared by the Board was not justified, in view of the fact, that this Court held that the successful candidates had a vested right and the Board was not justified in issuing a fresh advertisement without giving an opportunity of being heard to the successful candidates. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner, that by virtue of the order of this Court, he made a representation to the concerned authorities for consideration of his name. The authorities have not passed any order as far as the petitioner is concerned. This Court after two decades is unable to pass an order or direct the respondents, to consider the name of the petitioner for the post of Assistant Teacher in Hindi. Moreso, for the reasons, that after 1991 the State Government has issued several advertisement for making appointments to the post of Assistant Teachers. The petitioner seems to have not responded to the various advertisements by the State, and as such cannot claim implementation of the order of this Court 3 after two decades. I accordingly, find no merit in this writ application. Therefore, this writ application is dismissed. Anand Kr. ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)