IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.976 of 2005 Shiveshwar Jha, Son of Shri Mukteshwar Jha, Resident of Village- Panchgachhiya, P.S. Bihra Bazar, Distrcit- Saharsa ----- ----- Petitioner------ Appellant. Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Director-cum-Special Secretary, Education, Bihar, Secondary Office, Budhmarg, Patna. 3. The Deputy Director of Education, Bihar Secondary Office, Budh Marg, Patna. 4. The District Education Officer, Bhagalpur ----- Respondents- -- Respondents. ----------- 4. 30.6.2009 Heard Mr. Suresh Kumar Ishwar for the appellant. None appears on behalf of the respondents. Learned counsel for the appellant presses I.A. No.4442 of 2005, seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal. We are convinced about the explanation offered for the delay. The delay in filing the appeal is accordingly condoned. I.A N0. 4442 of 2005 is accordingly disposed of. As prayed for by learned counsel for the appellant, the appeal is taken on board “For Admission”. The appellant is aggrieved by the order dated 25.2.2005, passed by a learned Single Judge, in C.W.J.C. No.12607 of 1999 (Shiveshwar Jha Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.), whereby the writ petition has been dismissed. The appellant is a class III employee in the services of the Bihar Government and claims promotion to the post of assistant teacher on two grounds. Section 7 of the Service Condition Rules, 1983, provides that 5% vacancies of the assistant teachers in every calendar year shall be filled up by way of 2 appointment of clerks having the requisite qualification for the same. The petitioner also relies on the promotion given to clerk (s) under this Rules. It appears to us on a perusal of the materials before us that the said 1983 Rules has been replaced by the Bihar Secondary School Appointment Rules, 2004, which does not provide for any quota for clerks for promotion to the post of assistant teacher. As to the second ground taken on behalf of the appellant, law is well settled that any relief erroneously granted to any person can not be a ground to grant similar relief to another person, particularly in exercise of discretionary, prerogative writ jurisdiction. In that view of the matter, we entirely agree with the order of the learned Single judge. The appeal is dismissed. Vinay/ ( S. K. Katriar ,J. ) ( Jyoti Saran, J.)