IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.217 of 2009 Mahendra Sahs/o Nunu Lal Sah, re/o village Bhardhari (Roop Nagara), P.O. Roop Nagara, Ward no.37, P.S. Sharsa, District – Saharsa …………. Appellant Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The D.M., Saharsa 3. The A.D.M., Saharsa 4. The Establishment Deputy Collector Incharge, Saharsa 5. The N azarat Deputy Collector Incharge, Sharsa 6. The District Welfare Officer, Saharsa 7. The Office Superintendent, Saharsa Collectorate, Saharsa …………… Respondents ----------- 2 19-3-2009 The petitioner – appellant herein is working as candidate Peon in the Saharsa Collectorate. It appears that a panel for appointment to Class – IV posts was prepared by the competent authority in the years 1993 & 1997, wherein the petitioner’s name was included. Since the petitioner and others were not appointed, they approached this Court in CWJC. No.4021 of 2000 seeking direction to respondents to appoint them from the panel of 1993-94. The court on being conscious of the fact that since a panel can have a life of only year and that was expired in the said case directed the District Magistrate, Saharsa to take urgent steps to finalise fresh panel and in compliance thereof a fresh panel was - 2 - prepared but , unfortunately, the petitioner did not apply for empanelment as result of which his name was not included in the fresh panel. When the petitioner’s name was not included in the fresh panel, he again approached this court seeking a mandamus for appointment on Class – IV post in the Saharsa Collectorate and the learned Single Judge rejected the said application on being found that the petitioner’s name was not included because he did not apply for inclusion of his name in the fresh panel. It is an admitted fact that no panel for appointment in Government service can have a life of more than one year. It has to be prepared every year. If the petitioner did not apply for inclusion of his name in the fresh panel, he cannot be granted any relief. However, if any advertisement is made for preparation of fresh panel for the year, 2009, the petitioner, if so desired, may also apply and his name shall also be considered along with others. In the circumstances, we are not inclined to interfere with impugned order and, accordingly, the - 3 - appeal is dismissed. Neyaz/- ( J.B. Koshy, CJ.) (S. K. Sharma, J.)