IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6751 of 2011 1. DWARIKA PANDEY, son of Ram Prabesh Pandey, resident of village Dikshit Chak, P.S. Bihta, District- Patna. 2. Jaleshwar Prasad s/o late Chandu Ram, resident of village- Bhawani Tola, P.S. Maner, District- Patna…………… Petitioners Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR through its Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 2.The Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, patna. 3.The Commissioner-cum- Secretary, Finance Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 4.The Commissioner-cum- Secretary, Building Construction Department, Govt. of Bihar, Nirman Bhawan, Patna. 5.The Managing Director, Bihar State Housing Board. 6.The Secretary, Bihar State Housing Board, Patna. 7.The Executive Engineer, Division-I, Bihar State Housing Board, Hanuman Nagar, P.S. Patrakar Nagar, Patna.20. 8. The Executive Engineer, P.H.Division, Bihar State Housing Board, Bhutnath Road, P.S. Agam Kuan, District- Patna. 9. The Revenue Officer, Bihar State Housing Board, Mangles Road, Patna.15. ………………………… Respondents ----------- For the petitioners: Mr. Prem Kumar Tripathi, Advocate. For respondent Nos.5 to 9: Mr. R.S. Pradhan, Senior Advocate Mr. Binod Kumar, Advocate For the State: Mr. Subhash Prasad Singh, G.A.7. ------------ 2. 20.4.2011 The petitioners had earlier also approached this Court by filing C.W.J.C.No.3971 of 2005 for the same relief, which was dismissed by order dated 23.4.2008 holding that it suffered from unexplained delay, laches negligence and acquiescence since the claim for regularization in the Bihar Housing Board on class-IV posts is with effect from 22.10.1984, whereas the writ petition was filed on 24.3.2005. In the above circumstances, the second writ petition for the same relief is not - 2 - maintainable and it is clearly an abuse of the process of the Court. Learned counsel for the petitioners at this stage seeks permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to take recourse to appropriate remedy. Considering the aforesaid facts, this Court is of the view that this second writ petition must be dismissed and it is, accordingly, dismissed. Needless to say that with respect to the earlier writ petition, the petitioner may take recourse to appropriate remedy in accordance with law. VPS ( Ramesh Kumar Datta, J. )