IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.1588 of 2010 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 935 of 2005 ====================================================== 1. Rajesh Kumar Jha S/O Sri Pitamber Jha R/O Vill Malchak, P.O.Durmatta, P.S.Harpur, Distt-Munger .... .... Appellant/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Director Revenue, Administration Water Resources Department Bihar, Patna 3. Deputy Collector, Revenue Division, Water Resources Department Purnea 4. Deputy Collector, Revenue, Water Resources Department, Araria .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== 3 05-12-2011 Heard leaned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State. From the submissions of the parties, it is apparent that the appellant wants to take advantage of a policy decision of the State Government dated 2.5.1992. That policy decision contained in Annexure-A to the counter affidavit filed before the Writ Court shows that only upon recommendation by the Selection Committee on the basis of yardstick mentioned in the policy decision, some persons were regularized including Madhav Prasad Singh who had filed a writ petition in the year 1993 itself which was disposed of in July 1995. According to counter affidavit, the name of the appellant/ writ petitioner was not recommended by the selection Patna High Court LPA No.1588 of 2010 (3) dt.05-12-2011 2 committee. The writ petition is, therefore, without merits and belated also. We find no good reason to interfere with the order of the Writ Court. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. It goes without saying that if under any policy decision any benefit is to be given to erstwhile revenue Tax Collectors (Seasonal), the appellant may represent for such benefit before appropriate authority which should be considered in accordance with law. sk (Shiva Kirti Singh, J) (Shivaji Pandey, J)