IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.1124 of 2009 MUKESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA , S/0 Shri Tribhuban Prasad Sinha, resident of Mohalla-Salempur, P.S. Kotwali, Town Chapra, District- Saran. Versus 1. VICE CHANCELLOR,B.R.A.BIHAR University, Muzaffarpur, Bihar. 2. The Registrar, Bhim Rao Ambeddkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur, Bihar- 842002. 3. Examination Controller, Bhim Rao Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur, Bihar. 4. The Principal, Saran Homeopathic Medical College and Hospital (SHMCH), Gudari Bazar, Chapra, (Saran), Bihar. 5. Subhash Prasad, S/0 not known, R/O Lichi Bagan, Near Barhampur Bridge Gudari, Chapra, Saran,Bihar. ----------- 3. 16.2.2010 I.A.No.5543 of 2009 This is an application for condonation of delay of one day in preferring the appeal. Heard Mr. Keshav Srivastava, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant and Mr. Ajay Bihari Sinha, learned counsel for contesting respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Mr. Ajay Bihari Sinha, learned counsel for the University does not oppose the prayer for condonation of delay and accordingly, the delay in filing the appeal stands condoned. I.A. No.5543 of 2009 is, accordingly, disposed of. We are inclined to take up the appeal for the purpose of admission and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, it is finally heard. The correctness of the order dated 20.4.2009 passed by - 2 - the learned single Judge in C.W.J.C. No.4992 of 2009, whereby the learned single Judge has declined to entertain the writ petition on the ground that the appellant had sought for declaration of his result in respect of D.H.M.S. Examination held by Bhim Rao Ambedkar Bihar University in 1997, which was published in 1998 by applying doctrine of delay and laches, is called in question. Having heard learned Senior Counsel for the appellant and Mr. Ajay Bihari Sinha, learned counsel for the University, we are of the considered opinion that the appellant, who had appeared in D.H.M.S. Examination and was not declared to have passed in the year 1998, though it is claimed by Mr. Keshav Srivastava, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant that he was prosecuting his grievances before the University, could not get himself in slumber for span of a decade and one year, hence, we do not find any error of law in the order of the learned single Judge and accordingly, we concur with the same. The appeal, being devoid of any merit, is accordingly dismissed without any order as to costs. ( Dipak Misra, C.J.) ( Ramesh Kumar Datta,J.) VPS - 3 -