ORDER : 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State, as also learned Counsel for Respondent No. 4, Jharkhand Engineering Services Association. 2. The matter relates to the promotion to the post of Executive Engineer from amongst the Diploma Holder Assistant Engineers, in Road Construction Department of the State of Jharkhand. The appellant, initially filed the writ petition before this Court being WP(S) No. 3228 of 2014, praying therein inter alia for commanding the respondent State to formulate and notify the Jharkhand Engineering Service Rules for appointment and promotion to the post of Executive Engineers. The said writ petition was disposed of by order dated 9.1.2015, by the Hon'ble Single Judge of this Court, in the following terms:— “Heard the counsel for the parties. With the consent of respective counsels and keeping in view the submissions made in the interlocutory application for framing of the Rules within a period of four months, which is the grievance of the petitioner in the writ petition and also in view of the categorical affidavit sworn by the respondent No. 2 for framing of the rules within four months, the substantial relief sought for in the writ petition has became infructuous. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of being infructuous.” 3. Thereafter, the appellant filed a review petition in this Court, which was Civil Review No. 6 of 2015, against the aforesaid order, which was again dismissed by a detailed order dated 28.1.2015 passed by the same Hon'ble Single Judge, stating that since the order dated 9.1.2015 passed in WP(S) No. 3228 of 2014 was a consentaneous order, the review application did not warrant any interference and accordingly, the review petition was also dismissed. Aggrieved by these two orders, the present LPA has been filed, in which several interlocutory applications have also been filed from time to time. 4. This appeal, however, was admitted by order dated 18th May, 2015 and again by order dated 28th September 2015, some observations have been made by a Division Bench of this Court, regarding a seniority list, prepared for the promotion to the post of Executive Engineer from the Diploma Holder Assistant Engineers, stating that prima facie that senior list did not appear to be correct. By the said order, learned counsel for the respondents were granted time to understand as to how the seniority list was prepared. 5. By the said order, learned counsel for the respondents were granted time to understand as to how the seniority list was prepared. 5. However, thereafter, as per the undertaking given by the Department before this Court, the relevant Rules were also been framed namely, Jharkhand Engineering Services Recruitment Rules, 2016, and steps were taken for making the promotion in accordance with the said Rules. During the pendency of this LPA, the challenge to the said Rules was also made by filing an interlocutory application by the appellant. 6. The said matter has also been challenged in a different set of writ applications, by another set of petitioners, being WP(S) Nos. 3027 of 2016, 2984 of 2016 and 3031 of 2016, in which, the Jharkhand Engineering Services Recruitment Rules, 2016, is directly under challenge, and by order dated 17th August, 2017, passed by a Division Bench of this Court, an ad-interim order of stay has been passed therein, staying the process of promotion from the post of Diploma Holders Assistant Engineers to the post of Executive Engineer, as per the new Rules framed in the year 2016, and those writ applications are still pending. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant, in the present appeal, submits that in view of the order dated 28.9.2015, passed by this Court in the present LPA, whereby, whereby the prima facie view has been expressed by the Court against the seniority list prepared in the year 2015, process of promotion to the post of Executive Engineer, be stayed. 8. We are of the considered view that the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant cannot be acceded to, in view of the fact that new Rules have already been framed by the State Government in the year 2016 and same is under challenge before this Court in different writ applications, in which, the ad-interim order of stay has already been passed. Acceding to the prayer of the learned counsel for the appellant would only mean the multiplicity of the proceedings, which needs to be avoided at all costs. 9. The scope of the present LPA, is very limited, as the original writ application was filed by the appellant with a prayer, inter alia, to formulate and notify the Jharkhand Engineering Service Rules, which was disposed of by a consent order. 9. The scope of the present LPA, is very limited, as the original writ application was filed by the appellant with a prayer, inter alia, to formulate and notify the Jharkhand Engineering Service Rules, which was disposed of by a consent order. Prima facie, the present LPA has been filed against the consent order, passed by the learned Single Judge, and in our considered view, this LPA is not at all maintainable. Even otherwise, Jharkhand Engineering Services Recruitment Rules, 2016, have already been framed thereafter, and in any view of the matter, the grievance of the appellant is under consideration before this Court in the aforesaid three writ applications, which are pending before the Division Bench and in which, the said Rules is directly under challenge, and in which, ad-interim order of stay has already been passed, staying the process of promotion from the post of Diploma Holders Assistant Engineers to the post of Executive Engineer. 10. As such, there is no necessity of continuing with this Letters Patent Appeal, which is accordingly, dismissed. All the aforesaid interlocutory applications filed in this LPA, also stand disposed of. 11. We however, give the liberty to the appellants to intervene in those writ applications, i.e. WP(S) Nos. 3027 of 2006 and analogous writ applications, if they so like.