IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.317 of 2009 BABUA JEE ROY, S/o Sri Ramsakal Roy, R/o Village – Karwasi, P.S. – Sahar, Distt. – Bhojpur (Bihar) ………….…. Petitioner ….. Appellant Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, 2. Director General of Police, Patna, Bihar, 3. Deputy Inspector General of Police, Patna, Bihar, and 4. Addl. Director General of Police, Muzaffarpur Range, Muzaffarpur ……………………………. Respondents……. Respondents. ----------- 2. 01.04.2009. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. Petitioner – appellant was an applicant for the post of Constable under Advertisement No. 1/98. After the aforesaid advertisement, various writ petitions were filed before this Court on the issue of height. It is the case of the petitioner – appellant that even though, as per the physical test, his height was measured as 180.5 cm. but he was not appointed. The learned Single Judge in CWJC No. 12842/2000 and analogous cases, having noticed that the Court was being flooded with various such applications, vide the order dated 12.12.2000 directed the Director General of Police to issue general direction to the concerned D.I.G. or Zonal I.G. to adopt uniform policy 2 for dealing with such matters in accordance with law and the number of vacancy available, as it was contended by the petitioners that different yardsticks were applied in different places by the respondents for such appointment. Finally, an advertisement / public notice was published on 4.2.2001 asking the candidates, who were aggrieved, to raise objections within 15 days of the aforesaid advertisement. Contention of the petitioner – appellant is that, prior to the publication of the aforesaid advertisement / public notice; he had already applied for re-measurement of his height, so there was no laches on the part of the petitioner – appellant in not filing an application / objection after the aforesaid advertisement inviting objections. In our opinion, admittedly, the petitioner – appellant did not submit his representation within 15 days of the publication of the aforesaid public notice dated 4.2.2001. Plea of the petitioner – appellant that he had earlier applied for re-measurement of his height is not enough, in view of the fresh public notice dated 4.2.2001. We agree with the views taken by the learned Single Judge in the impugned order. 3 The appeal is devoid of merit. It is accordingly dismissed. ( J.B. Koshy, CJ ) dk ( Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J. )