IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16524 of 2007 SUBODH CHANDRA SINGH W i t h CWJC No.16895 of 2007 SANJIV KUMAR SINGH W i t h CWJC No.17035 of 2007 PRITTI RANJAN Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2/ 4/7/2008. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. The petitioners seek to question the appointment of respondents- 8 and 13 on the post of Siksha Mitra made as far back as 1.8.2003 for a contractual period of 11 months which would have come to an end on 1.7.2004. In support of the submissions that the petitioners claim to have moved before the authorities during this period of 11 months when they may have had a cause of action learned counsel invites the attention of the Court to the pleadings in paragraph-15 of the writ application. The pleadings therein are completely vague with no details of dates on which such applications were given and neither has any copy thereof been annexed. The Court declines to accept the same for reasons of vagueness. What emerges therefrom is that for an appointment of 1.8.2003 the petitioner has filed this writ application as late as 14.12.2007 when in the meantime new statutory rules have come into force regulating such appointment on 1.7.2006. The petitioners have to blame themselves for their indolent and lethargic attitude. - 2 - There is no merit in this writ application. The same is accordingly dismissed. KC ( Navin Sinha,J )