JUDGMENT Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya,J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned State Counsel. 2. The petitioner through this petition has prayed that the opposite parties be directed to consider the case of the petitioner for appointing him on the post of Gram Panchayat Adhikari in the light of the orders said to have been issued by the opposite parties. 3. The petitioner appears to have been appointed on stop gap temporary basis in the year 1983, however, by means of the order dated 2/3.05.1984, passed by the District Panchayat Raj Officer, Raebareli, the services of the petitioner along with certain others were dispensed with. 4. The petitioner relies upon an order issued by Khand Vikas Adhikari (B.D.O), Shivgarh dated 18.06.1985, whereby the petitioner was again appointed and he was directed to take charge. 5. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner never came to know of the order dated 18.06.1985 as the same was never communicated to him, as such, he could not submit his joining pursuant to the order dated 18.06.1985. Learned counsel for the petitioner thereafter has drawn attention of the Court of the another order dated 23.04.1987, passed by the Deputy Director (Administration), Panchayati Raj, U.P., whereby the petitioner appears to have been transferred from district-Raebareli to district-Lucknow. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that since 1987 he has continuously been making representations to the authorities for allowing his joining, however, no heed has yet been paid by the authorities on his grievances. 6. Admittedly, initial appointment of the petitioner was made on temporary basis in stop gap arrangement and his services were terminated by means of the order dated 02/3.05.1984 by the District Panchayat Raj Officer, Raebareli. 7. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was never apprised of the order dated 18.06.1985, passed by the Block Development Officer (B.D.O) reappointing him on the post of Gram Panchayat Adhikari, does not appeal to reason. More so, admittedly, the cause of action to the petitioner accrued in the year 1985-86, almost in the year 1987, when the alleged transfer order dated 23.04.1987 appears to have been passed. More so, admittedly, the cause of action to the petitioner accrued in the year 1985-86, almost in the year 1987, when the alleged transfer order dated 23.04.1987 appears to have been passed. In the writ petition, no reasons whatsoever has been given by the petitioner for filing this writ petition at this belated stage after expiry of thirty years, as such, I am not inclined to interfere in this writ petition, which is hereby dismissed.