ORDER : D.N. Patel, J. I.A. No. 531 of 2017 1. This interlocutory application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has been filed by the appellant for condonation of delay of 1 day in preferring the instant Letters Patent Appeal. 2. Having heard learned counsel and looking to the reasons stated in paragraphs 4, 5, 6 and 7 of the interlocutory application, there are reasonable reasons for condoning the delay in preferring the instant Letters Patent Appeal. 3. Accordingly, LA. No. 531 of 2017 is allowed and delay in filing the instant appeal is condoned. L.P.A. No.4 of 2017 4. This Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred by the original petitioner being aggrieved and feeling dissatisfied by the Judgment and order delivered by learned Single Judge in W.P.(S) No. 6192 of 2006 dated 25th November. 2016. whereby the prayer of this appellant for appointment on the post of Constable was not accepted by this Court and, hence, the original petitioner has preferred the present Letters Patent Appeal. 5. Having heard learned counsels for both sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that in pursuant to an advertisement No. 2/2005 for the post of Constables, this appellant (original petitioner) preferred an application. It further appears that this appellant shown in his application that he basically belongs to Scheduled Caste category from the State of Bihar. It further appears that this appellant (original petitioner) has been treated as a General Category candidate because, he is not a Scheduled Caste candidate who is a resident within the State of Jharkhand. rather. the appellant is a scheduled caste candidate of the State of Bihar. 6. It ought to be kept in mind that as per Article 341 of the Constitution of India, every State is entitled to declare Scheduled Castes for their own State. The State of Jharkhand has not declared the cast to which this appellant is belonging. as a Scheduled Caste and, hence, this appellant is a scheduled caste in the State of Bihar. but. he cannot be treated as scheduled caste category within the State of Jharkhand. 7. It has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Melwin Chiras Kujur vs. State of Maharashtra and Others, reported in (2015) 17 SCC 549 in paragraph 8 as under:- "8. but. he cannot be treated as scheduled caste category within the State of Jharkhand. 7. It has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Melwin Chiras Kujur vs. State of Maharashtra and Others, reported in (2015) 17 SCC 549 in paragraph 8 as under:- "8. The legal position as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the appellant has been firmly settled by the two decisions of the Constitution Bench referred to by us in the earlier paragraphs. Benefits of reservations are not available to those migrating from one State to the other even if such candidates belong to the same caste. That part of the controversy. therefore. stands concluded and does not require any further elaboration. What remains to be examined is whether the appellant's forefathers had migrated to the State of Maharashtra before the year 1950. In the ordinary course this may have required a remand to the High Court to examine that aspect but having regard, to the pronouncement of this Court in Milind case, we consider it unnecessary to do so." (Emphasis supplied) 8. In view of the aforesaid decision. if a scheduled caste candidate. who is declared as such under Article 341 of the Constitution of India. is migrating from one State to another State. his status of Scheduled Caste category' may not continue. it all depends upon the fact whether the State to which such candidate is migrating. has declared the caste as scheduled caste or not. In the facts of the present case, the caste to which this appellant belongs, has not been declared as scheduled caste under Article 341 of the Constitution of India. Even otherwise, this appellant belongs to Vaishali (Bihar) and, hence, this appellant cannot be given the benefit of reserved category quota, within the State of Jharkhand, unless, his caste is declared as Scheduled Caste by the State of Jharkhand under Article 341 of the Constitution of India. 9. Assuming without admitting, this appellant belongs to scheduled caste category, then. also, as stated in the counter affidavit filed by the respondents, this appellant has secured 15 marks, whereas, lastly selected candidate in the scheduled caste category has secured 17 marks. 9. Assuming without admitting, this appellant belongs to scheduled caste category, then. also, as stated in the counter affidavit filed by the respondents, this appellant has secured 15 marks, whereas, lastly selected candidate in the scheduled caste category has secured 17 marks. Hence also, there is no case of this appellant to be selected on the post of Constable being in the reserved category for scheduled castes, because, lastly selected candidate has secured higher marks than this appellant even in the scheduled caste category candidates. In the general category, the lastly selected candidate has secured 20 marks. Hence, also, the present appellant cannot be appointed on the post of Constable. 10. It has also been argued out by the counsel for the appellant that one candidate namely Milan Sheikh has secured lesser marks than this appellant. This is factually incorrect, because, as stated in the counter affidavit, said Milan Sheikh has secured 21 marks in the backward caste category candidates. Thus, the marks secured by Milan Sheikh is higher than the marks secured by this appellant. All the aforesaid facts have been properly appreciated by the learned Single Judge while dismissing the writ petition preferred by this appellant. 11. As a cumulative effect of aforesaid facts, reasons and judicial pronouncements, no error has been committed by the learned Single Judge in dismissing the writ petition preferred by this appellant. Hence, there is no substance in this Letters Patent Appeal and the same is, therefore, dismissed.