IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.7 of 2008 The Bihar Sharirik Shiksha Shi . Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors . ----------- For the appellants : Mr. Kripa Nand Jha, Advocate For the Respondents/State : Mr. Satish Narain Singh, A.C. to G.A.-2 ------------ 9. 4.8.2011 The appellants have chosen to question the non- implementation of the reservation policy as contained in the decision of the year 1981 but, however, learned single Judge have observed 2006 Rules have come into force from 1.7.2006. The appellants have no case to seek relief of reservation. However, in view of the fact that 2006 Rules, which are called as Bihar Panchayat Primary Teachers Rules 2006 have come into force on 1.7.2006 and it has already been upheld by this Court, we are of the opinion that as the policy is of the year 1981, it cannot be sustained as on today. However, if the appellants are still aggrieved they can make representation to the Government for implementation of the reservation policy, if any. By eflux of time and enactment of Rules 2006 which has been upheld by this Court in L.P.A. and the said L.P.A. has been dismissed as infructuous and the interveners have been directed to make appropriate representation before the Government. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant that contempt petition (Civil) No.297 of 2007 has been filed before the Apex Court and appellants are 2 interveners in the contempt petition as also in the Special Leave Petition(Civil) no.22882 of 2004 and the matter has been disposed of on 14.7.2011 with certain directions ( the copy order is not produced before us). However, an oral submission has been made that a fresh panel has been prepared by the Government in accordance with the seniority and merit as per the year of relevant examination. In view of the above, liberty is granted to the appellant to make a representation to the Government in accordance with the order of the Apex Court. If the appellants are interveners before the Supreme Court, liberty is granted to them to make representation in accordance with the order of the Supreme Court before the Government, if they so desires. Accordingly, this Letters Patent Appeal stands disposed of. Sudip ( T. Meena Kumari, J.) ( Vikash Jain, J. )