Letters Patent Appeal No.272 OF 2003. ----- Against the judgment and order dated 29.07.2002 passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No. 4170 of 2002. ----- 1. The High Court of Judicature at Patna through its Registrar General. 2. The Co-ordination Committee-cum-District and Sessions Judge, Patna through its Convener Constituted under Rule 11 of Bihar Civil Court, Staff Rules, 1992. .....Respondents....Appellants. -Versus- 1. Gaynendra Narain Singh, Son of Sri Ram Lakhan Singh, resident of 43, L.I.C. Colony, Police Station-Patrakar Nagar, P.O. Chitragupta Nagar, District-Patna. 2. Chitranjan Kumar, Son of Sri Lalan Singh, resident of Sarwan Uswan Chak, P.S. and District- Patna. .....Petitioners...Respondents. 3. The State of Bihar. 4. Co-ordination Committee-cum-District and Sessions Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur through its convenor, constituted under Rule 11 of Bihar Civil Courts Staff Rules, 1992. 5. The Co-ordination Committee-cum- District and Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh, Ranchi Zone, Sahebganj through its Member Constituted Rule 11 of the Bihar Civil Court Staff Rules-1992. 6. The Co-ordination Committee-cum-District and Sessions Judge, Darbhanga Zone-Saharsa through its Member Constituted under Rule 11 of the Bihar Civil Staff Rules, 1992. 7. District and Sessions Judge, Saharsa under Amended Rule 5 of Bihar Civil Court Staff Class-III and IV Rules, 2001.....Respondents....... Respondents. ------ ‘ P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ----- Navin Sinha & D.K.Singh,JJ. Heard learned counsel for the appellants. None appears for the respondents. The panel in respect of which the controversy arises appears to have been prepared in the year 1997. No appointment from that panel is 2 permissible in law at this stage as that itself violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India. With the aforesaid modification, the appeal stands disposed off. (Navin Sinha,J) (Dinesh Kumar Singh,J) Patna High Court Dated 22nd April, 2010. N.A.F.R./U.K.