IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.600 of 2008 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus RANJEET KUMAR & ORS with LPA. No.583 of 2008 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. Versus RANJEET KUMAR & ORS. ----------- For the appellants: Mr. Mayank Rukhaiyar (in both appeals) JC to G.A. V For the respondent no.1 : Mr. Rajeev Kumar Singh (in both appeals) P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice And Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal --- Dated, the 19th August, 2008 These two appeals have been taken up together as in both the appeals parties are same. LPA. No.583 of 2008 2. LPA. No.583 of 2008 has been preferred by the State government and its functionaries for setting aside the order dated 18th April, 2007. 3. This appeal suffers from delay of 1 year and 74 days. For condonation thereof, an application (IA. No.4564 of 2008) has been made. 4. Even if, we condone the delay in filing the appeal, for reasons set out in the application, we are of the view that the 2 appeal does not have any merit and does not deserve to be admitted. 5. In the impugned order, the single judge has observed thus: “The learned Government Advocate has fairly submitted that in light of the decision taken by the Bihar Intermediate Education Council, as contained in the aforesaid Press Communique no.56/96 dated 4.9.1996, the order of cancellation of the appointment of the petitioner on the post of Panchayat Teacher could not be sustained in law.” 6. In the light of the aforesaid concession of the Government Advocate , which is not under challenge, the single judge cannot be said to have committed any error in granting the relief to the petitioner to the extent noticed in the order. 7. LPA. No. 583 of 2008 deserves to be dismissed and is dismissed. 8. This disposes of I.A.No.4564 of 2008. LPA. No. 600 of 2008 9. LPA. No.600 of 2008 has been filed being aggrieved by the order passed by the single judge in the review application (Civil Review No.146 of 2007). The review application was made by the State Government and its functionaries seeking review of the order dated 18th April, 2007. 10. This appeal also suffers from delay. However, the delay is only of two days. For condonation thereof, an application (IA. No.4705 of 2008) has been made. 3 11. Even if we condone the delay in filing the appeal, and that we do, we find that the appeal has no merit and does not deserve to be admitted. 12. The single judge has considered the review application in right perspective and we have no justifiable reason to take a view different from that of the single judge. 13. LPA. No.600 of 2008 deserves to be dismissed and is dismissed. 14. This disposes of I.A.No.4705 of 2008 as well. R. M. Lodha, CJ. Kishore K. Mandal, J. Neyaz/-