IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.1265 of 2011 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 11100 of 2000 With Interlocutory Application No. 6237 of 2011 In Letters Patent Appeal No.1265 of 2011 ====================================================== Md. Naimuddin S/o Late Md. Jalaluddin, Resident of Village Araila P.S. Tiyar District Bhojpur. .... .... Petitioner/Appellant Versus 1. The Bihar Public Service Commission through its Chairman, 15, Jawaharlal Nehru Marg (Bailey Road), Patna-1. 2. The Budget-cum-Accounts Officer, Bihar Public Service Commission, 15, Jawaharlal Nehru Marg (Bailey Road), Patna-1. 3. The Deputy Secretary, Bihar Public Service Commission, 15, Jawaharlal Nehru Marg (Bailey Road), Patna-1. 4. The Assistant Secretary, Bihar Public Service Commission, 15, Jawaharlal Nehru Marg (Bailey Road), Patna-1. 5. The State of Bihar through the Director Primary Education, Bihar, Patna. .... .... Respondents/Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant : Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent BPSC: Mr. Sanjay Pandey, Advocate For the State: Mr. Dilip Kumar, A.C. to G.A.-1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Patna High Court LPA No.1265 of 2011 (2) dt.12-09-2011 2 / 2 2 2. 12-09-2011 This Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent is filed by the writ petitioner against the judgment and order dated 18th January 2008 passed by the learned single Judge in above C.W.J.C. No. 11100 of 2000. The Appeal is filed 3 years and 157 days beyond the period of limitation. Evidently, the Appeal has been filed on account of a Division Bench judgment of this Court dated 21st April 2011 made in respect of recruitment of Sub Inspectors of Police pursuant to the advertisement published on 21st September 2004. The appellant seeks appointment as a teacher pursuant to the advertisement published in 1996. The subsequent judgment, may be on an identical issue, will not give a cause of action to the appellant. Appellant has not made out any cause much less a sufficient cause for the delay in question. The Application and consequently the Letters Patent Appeal are rejected. Pawan/- (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)