ORDER : These three Appeals preferred under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent arise from the common judgment and order dated 14th November 2011 passed by the learned single Judge insofar as C.W.J.C. Nos. 7566 of 2005, 6799 of 2006 and 11651 of 2006 have been dismissed. 2. The matter at issue is the allotment of Shop No.58 in the Market Yard of the Bihar State Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Musallahpur, Patna. The allotment of the said shop was initially made in favour of one S. Zahid Hussain, petitioner in C.W.J.C. No. 6799 of 2006. The same came to be cancelled on the premise that the licensee S. Zahid Hussain had failed to pay the licence fee and to do business in the said shop. Instead, the said licensee had sublet the shop. 3. The learned single Judge has rejected the claim of the writ petitioner in C.W.J.C. No. 6799 of 2006 on the premise that although he had been given the licence for shop no.58, since 2004 he had neglected to pay the rent or to continue the business. Contrary to the terms of licence, he had sublet the shop. 4. The allotment of the said shop no.58 to the petitioner in C.W.J.C. No. 7566 of 2005 made in December 2004 has been cancelled in June 2005 on the premise that the said allotment was made out of turn bypassing other 29 applicants above the writ petitioner. The learned single Judge has rejected the claim made by the writ petitioner in C.W.J.C. No. 7566 of 2005 and upheld the cancellation of licence given to him for Shop No.58 on the premise that he had been allotted the said shop out of turn. 5. The writ petitioner in C.W.J.C. No. 11651 of 2006 made the claim that he was the first applicant for allotment of shop as early as in 1988-89. According to the said writ petitioner, he had obtained licence to do business in the Market Yard as early as in 1978-79. He being the first licence, he had the first right to allotment of shop. He had made application for allotment of shop no.58 in 1988-89. 6. According to the said writ petitioner, he had obtained licence to do business in the Market Yard as early as in 1978-79. He being the first licence, he had the first right to allotment of shop. He had made application for allotment of shop no.58 in 1988-89. 6. Claim of the writ petitioner in C.W.J.C. No. 11651 of 2006 is rejected on the ground that although the writ petitioner may have been the first licensee, he could not prove application for allotment of shop allegedly made by him in 1988-89. The first ever application he could prove was that of 2006, after the Market Committee was dissolved under the Repeal Act of 2006. 7. The learned single Judge has also observed that the allotment of the shops was made on the basis of the date of the application in chronological order and not from the date of the licence. 8. The learned single Judge has recorded detailed facts and has given cogent reasons for rejecting the aforesaid writ petitions. In our opinion, the Appeals are devoid of any merit. Appeals are dismissed in limine. 9. Interlocutory Applications stand disposed of.