IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8703 of 2011 SHAILESH KUMAR, SON OF RAM CHANDRA CHOUDHARY, RESIDENT OF M.91, SAHIB BHAGAT SINGH COLONY, MUSTAPHABAD, POLICE STATION RAMPUR, DISTRICT GAYA--------------------------------PETITIONER Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA 3.A.N.SINHA INSTITUTE OF SOCIAL STUDIES THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR, GANDHI MAIDAN, POLICE STATION KOTWALI, DISTRICT PATNA 4.THE DIRECTOR, A.N.SINHA INSTITUTE OF SOCIAL STUDIES, GANDHI MAIDAN, POLICE STATION GANDHI MAIDAN, DISTRICT PATNA 5.THE SECRETARY, A.N.SINHA INSTITUTE OF SOCIAL STUDIES, GANDHI MAIDAN, POLICE STATION GANDHI MAIDAN, DISTRICT PATNA 6.DR.AJIT KUMAR HANSDA, LECTURER IN POLITICAL SCIENCE, A.N.SINHA INSTITUTE OF SOCIAL STUDIES, GANDHI MAIDAN, POLICE STATION GANDHI MAIDAN, DISTRICT PATNA 7.DR.AWADHESH KUMAR, LECTURER IN ECONOMICS, A.N.SINHA INSTITUTE OF SOCIAL STUDIES, GANDHI MAIDAN, POLICE STATION GANDHI MAIDAN, DISTRICT PATNA-----------------------------RESPONDENTS ----------- For the petitioner :M/S Yogesh Chandra Verma, Sr.Advocate Pramod Kumar, Advocate For ANSinha Institute:M/S Lalit Kishore, Sr.Advocate Piyush Lal, Advocate For the State : Ms.Neelam Prasad, AC to GP 25 ------ 3. 17.5.2011 The petitioner had earlier also come to this Court with respect to the Advertisement dated 5.12.2009 (Annexure-2) issued by A.N.Sinha Institute of Social Studies, Patna advertising for the vacancy for the post of Lecturer and Reader, seeking direction to the respondents to consider and appoint the petitioner on the post of Lecturer in the Department of Economics in the light of the 2 advertisement. This Court by order dated 14.12.2010 had dismissed the writ petition finding no merit in it. Again the petitioner has filed the present writ petition claiming benefit under the same advertisement for appointment on the second vacant post of Lecturer which was advertised for B.C.I. and General category only. Learned counsel for the petitioner is unable to show how repeatedly relief can be claimed under the same advertisement by him when earlier his prayer has been rejected by this Court with respect to the same. The writ application is, accordingly, dismissed as not maintainable. At this stage, learned counsel for the respondent A.N.Sinha Institute of Social Studies informs this Court that further advertisement had also been issued and, as a matter of fact, no appointment has been made against the advertisement dated 5.12.2009 but against the subsequent advertisement only. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty to assert his rights in terms of appointment made in the subsequent advertisement. He is granted liberty to do so. 3 It is made clear that grant of liberty does not mean that this Court has expressed any view on the merit or maintainability of the writ petition to be filed by the petitioner. (Ramesh Kumar Datta,J.) Spal/