Patna High Court
Deepak Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 26 March, 2025
Author: Purnendu Singh
Bench: Purnendu Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6030 of 2024
======================================================
Deepak Kumar Son of Ramashankar Singh, resident of village- Janjara,
Malwara, Police Station - Shiv Sagar, District - Rohtas at Sasaram, State -
Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Law Department, Bihar, Patna.
2. Patna High Court through the Registrar General, Patna High Court, Patna.
3. The Convenor, Coordination Committee Patna -cum-District and Session
Judge, Patna.
4. Suresh Kumar Singh Son of Bindeshwari Singh, Resident of village- Kuriya
(Bangari), P.S. - Piprakothi, District - East Champaran.
5. Md. Farrukh Imam, Son of Md. Nesar Ahmad, resident of C/o Sri Md.
Jamaluddin Charuanwan, P.O. - Charuanwan, via Nima, District -
Sheikhpura, Bihar - 811103.
6. Prashant Kumar, Son of Bishwamohan Thakur, resident of mohalla - Ward
No. 40, Sahjanand Thakur, Road No. 1, Begusarai Sadar, Begusarai, Bihar -
851101.
7. Jagat Narayan Rai, Son of Radha Prasad Rai, Resident of village- Mahadev
Chak, Post- Purana Haripur, P.S. - Koelwar, District- Bhojpur.
8. Nikhil Kumar, Son of Brajesh Prasad, resident of Village - Bhawanipur, P.O.
- Thikahan Bhawanipur, Pakri, Sangrampur, District - East Champaran-
845434.
9. Shreekant Kumar, Son of Ramkundal Mahto, Resident of village and P.O. -
Onda, P.S. - Sare, District- Nalanda, Bihar - 803107.
10. Priyatam Patel, Son of Ramesh Patel, Resident of Village - Kuttubchak, P.O.
- Ramjanpur, P.S. Barbigha, District - Sheikhpura, Bihar - 811101.
11. Sanjay, Son of Ramjee Singh, Resident of House No. 09, Pahalwan Ji Gali,
North of D.V.C. Road, Yarpur, Patna, G.P.O. - Patna, Bihar - 800001.
12. Chandan Kumar, Son of Nand Kishor Sah, Resident of Village - Bishnupur,
P.O. - Bishnupur, P.S. Bela, District- Sitamarhi, Bihar- 843324.
13. Vikash Kumar, Son of Anil Prasad, residence of Mohalla - Chiriyatand, Janta
Path Lane, P.O. - GPO, P.S. Kankarbagh, District- Patna, Bihar - 800001.
14. Dhiraj Kumar, Son of Ramprit Mahto, Resident of Village- Bahrampur, P.O.
- Naipur, P.S. Bachhwara, District - Begusarai.
15. Saurabh Kumar, Son of Satyanand Prasad, Resident of Village and P.O. -
Khanetoo, P.S. Tekari, District - Gaya.
16. Amrendra Kumar, Son of Sakaldeo Vind Resident of Village - Kare, P.S. and
P.O. - Sheikhpura, District- Sheikhpura.
17. Pankaj Kumar, Son of Birendra Sah, Resident of village- Chaura, P.O. and
P.S. Chaura, District- Jamui.
18. Nityanan Kumar, Son of Sitaram Prasad, Resident of village - Bediban
Madhuban, P.O. - Madhuban, P.S. - Pipra, District- East Champaran.
Patna High Court CWJC No.6030 of 2024 dt.26-03-2025
2/10
19. Gaurav Kumar, Son of Sri Surendra Prasad, resident of Village - Gokulchak
Milki, P.O. - Kapsiyawan, P.S. Hilsa, District- Nalanda.
20. Kunal, Son of Shivnandan Prasad Yadav, Resident of Village- Alinagar, P.O.
- Barbigha, P.S. Sare, District- Nalanda, Bihar - 811101.
21. Ajay Kaushal, Son of Lal Babu Bhagat, resident of Village - Mohanpur, P.O.
and P.S. - Maner, District - Patna.
22. Amit Kumat, Son of Vidyasagar Gupta, resident of Mohalla - Chiraiyatarnd,
P.O. - GPO, P.S. - Jakkanpur, District- Patna.
23. Bipin Kumar, Son of Rajendra Prasad Singh, resident of village, P.O. and
P.S. Kako, District- Jehanabad.
24. Vinti Ranjan, Son of Satyendra Singh, resident of village - Simaru, P.O. and
P.S. - Gurua, District - Gaya.
25. Kunal Kumar Verma, Son of Ajay Kumar Verma, Resident of Village -
Janakpur (Maurya Nagar), P.O. - Buniaganj, P.S. - Mufassil, District - Gaya.
26. Tarun Kumar, Son of Japdish Prasad, resident of Village and P.O. -
Dhanchhuhan, P.S. - Churi, District- Bhojpur.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Manoj Kumar Singh, Advocate
For R.Nos.2 & 3 : Mr.Piyush Lall, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Kameshwar Kumar, GP 17
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 26-03-2025
Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner, learned counsel for the Respondent nos.2 & 3 and the
learned counsel for the State.
2. The petitioner in paragraph no. 1 of the present writ
petition has sought inter alia following relief(s), which is
reproduced hereinafter:-
"(i) For issuance of writ, in the nature of mandamus
or an appropriate writ direction or directions, order or
orders commanding the respondent authorities to
select and appoint of the petitioner in the light of
judgment dated 17.04.2023 passed by this Hon'ble
Court in LPA No.650 of 2022 and its analogous cases
by which direction was issued to centralized selection
Patna High Court CWJC No.6030 of 2024 dt.26-03-2025
3/10
and appointment to the post of Clerk in pursuant to
employment notice no.01/2026 and the petitioner
comes under the purview of said judgment and has
more marks than the selected and appointed
candidates.
(ii) For that, issuance of a direction, order or writ,
including writ in the nature of mandamus
commanding the concerned respondent authorities to
extend all the consequential benefits in favour of the
petitioner after appointing and allowing them to
submit their joining against the posts of clerks in the
subordinate courts within the State of Bihar on the
basis of their respective position in the consolidated
merit list of all the candidates prepared by the
concerned authorities in the office of the Convener,
Co-ordination Committee, Patna pursuant to
Employment Notice No.1/2016.
(iii) For that, issuance of a declaration holding that
the petitioners, amongst other persons, are entitled for
being considered for appointment and joining against
the posts of clerks in different subordinate courts
within the State of Bihar on the basis of their
respective position in the merit list prepared by the
concerned respondent authorities upon conclusion of
the process of selection pursuant to Employment
Notice No.01/2016 in terms of the provisions
contained under the Bihar Civil Court Staff (Class III
and Class IV) Rules, 2009.
(iv) Any other relief/reliefs that the
petitioner/petitioners may be found to be entitled to in
the facts and circumstances of the present case."
3. By an Advertisement dated 07.02.2016, the office
of the Convenor, Co-ordination Committee, Patna-cum-District
& Sessions Judge, Patna invited online applications for filling
up of 1681 posts in Grade III (Clerk), as per the reservation
roster. On 26.09.2018, select list was published. The petitioner
being a candidate of Backward Caste category was selected and
Patna High Court CWJC No.6030 of 2024 dt.26-03-2025
4/10
his name was in the panel (at Sl.No.1680), having secured total
71.50 marks.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that the petitioner has secured higher marks
(71.50) than respondent nos. 8, 9, 10, 20 and 23, all belonging to
B.C. category, (respondent no.8 - 71.33 marks, respondent no.9
- 71.33 marks, respondent no.10 - 71.28 marks, respondent
no.20 - 70.00 marks, respondent no.23 - 69.00 marks). In spite
of that, respondent nos. 8, 9, 10, 20 and 23 were selected and
appointed but the petitioner was not appointed.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner in this regard has relied upon the judgment dated
19.04.2023
passed in LPA No.650 of 2022 and referring to
paragraph nos. 20, 21 and 22, he claims equity with those
candidates, who had approached the writ court in the year, 2018
and 2019.
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of Patna High
Court has submitted that the Advertisement is of the year, 2016
and the merit list was published on 26.09.2018 and thereafter
being aggrieved by non-selection, some of the candidates
preferred CWJC No.21219 of 2018, CWJC No.6259 of 2019
and CWJC No.1414 of 2019. The relief(s) sought by those
Patna High Court CWJC No.6030 of 2024 dt.26-03-2025
candidates were not entertained by the learned Single Judge and
thereafter, they preferred Letters Patent Appeal, which were
allowed.
7. Learned counsel further submitted the writ
jurisdiction is not for indolent and in this regard, he has referred
the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of State of U.P.
& Ors. vs. Harish Chandra and Ors. reported in (1996) 9
SCC 309.
8. At this stage, this Court inquired from the learned
counsel for the Patna High Court as to whether the posts are still
vacant, upon which, he replied in affirmative. He further
informed this Court that the validity of the panel was for only
two years and the petitioner can not claim equity with those
candidates who were agile and they had suffered and
immediately rushed this Court.
9. Learned counsel further submitted that as the panel
has already expired and now filing belated representation before
the learned Registrar General of Patna High Court, will not
claim for equity in any manner with those candidates who had
approached this Court. Learned counsel further made it clear
that the judgment passed in LPA No.650 of 2022 can be
considered to have been passed in persona and not in rem and in
Patna High Court CWJC No.6030 of 2024 dt.26-03-2025
this regard, he refers to observation made in Paragraph No.20,
which is re-produced inter alia hereinafter, as follows : -
"20. Accordingly, the order of the learned Single
dated 29.09.2022 passed in CWJC No.6259 of 2019
and connected matters stands set aside. While
allowing LPA No.650 of 2022 (arising out of CWJC
no.6259 of 2019), LPA No.657 of 2022 (arising out of
CWJC No.21219 of 2018), & LPA No.661 of 2022
(arising out of CWJC No.21219 of 2018) the
concerned selecting/appointing authority is hereby
directed to consider each of the petitioners name for
the purpose of appointment tot the post of Clerk
against unfilled vacancies and anticipated vacancies
during the relevant period of two years and
necessary order of appointment shall be issued to
each of the eligible petitioner within a period of three
months from the date of receipt of this order. If any, of
the candidate is not suitable or eligible in that event
necessary speaking order shall be passed and
communicated to such petitioner/s."
10. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State
submitted that the the law is well settled in respect of those
persons, who approached this Court and the candidates who
remained as fence sitter can not be allowed to claim equity.
Particularly, in the present case, in spite of the fact that the
similarly situated person had approached this Court in the year
2018-2019 and the petitioner after the judgment dated
19.04.2023 passed in LPA No.650 of 2023 and other analogous
cases has filed his representation before the learned Registrar
General of Patna High Court for considering his case as the
posts are still vacant, which will not entitle him in any manner
Patna High Court CWJC No.6030 of 2024 dt.26-03-2025
for being appointed.
11. Heard the parties.
12. Before I proceed to decide the writ petition on
merit, preliminary question arises - whether the writ petitioner,
who was waiting on the fence from the year, 2018, has filed writ
petition after six years of publication of the select list, can it be
entertained? It is well settled law laid down by the Apex Court
that if it is found that the writ petitioner is guilty of delay and
laches, the High Court should dismiss it at the threshold. Close
to the facts of this case, the Apex Court in the case of State of
U.P. & Ors. (supra), relied by Mr. Piyush Lal, learned counsel
appearing for the respondents, and similarly a Co-ordinate
Bench of this Court in CWJC no.10450 of 2024 has relied on
the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Ex. Capt. Harish
Uppal v. Union of India reported in 1994 SCC Supl. (2) 195.
The Hon'ble Apex Court has held as under :
"8.The petitioner sought to contend that because of
laches on his part, no third party rights have
intervened and that by granting relief to the
petitioner no other person's rights are going to be
affected. He also cited certain decisions to that
effect. This plea ignores the fact that the said
consideration is only one of the considerations
which the court will take into account while
determining whether a writ petition suffers from
laches. It is not the only consideration. It is a well-
settled policy of law that the parties should pursue
their rights and remedies promptly and not sleep
Patna High Court CWJC No.6030 of 2024 dt.26-03-2025
over their rights. That is the whole policy behind the
Limitation Act and other rules of limitation. If they
choose to sleep over their rights and remedies for an
inordinately long time, the court may well choose to
decline to interfere in its discretionary jurisdiction
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and
that is what precisely the Delhi High Court has
done. We cannot say that the High Court was not
entitled to say so in its discretion."
13. The Apex Court in "C. Jacob Versus Director of
Geology and Mining and Other reported in (2008) 10 SCC
115, having found that the employee suddenly brought up a
challenge to the order of termination of his services after 20
years and claimed all consequential benefits, held that the relief
sought for was inadmissible. The legal position in this regard
was laid out in the following terms:-
"10. Every representation to the
government for relief, may not be replied on
merits. Representations relating to matters which
have become stale or barred by limitation, can be
rejected on that ground alone, without examining
the merits of the claim. In regard to
representations unrelated to the department, the
reply may be only to inform that the matter did
not concern the department or to inform the
appropriate department. Representations with
incomplete particulars may be replied by seeking
relevant particulars. The replies to such
representations, cannot furnish a fresh cause of
action or revive a stale or dead claim.
11. When a direction is issued by a
court/tribunal to consider or deal with the
representation, usually the directee (person
directed) examines the matter on merits, being
under the impression that failure to do may
amount to disobedience. When an order is passed
Patna High Court CWJC No.6030 of 2024 dt.26-03-2025
considering and rejecting the claim or
representation, in compliance with direction of
the court or tribunal, such an order does not
revive the stale claim, nor amount to some kind of
`acknowledgment of a jural relationship' to give
rise to a fresh cause of action."
14. Reiterating the aspect of delay and laches would
dis-entitle the discretionary relief being granted, the Apex Court
in the case of Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply &
Sewerage board V. T.T. Murali Babu, reported in (2014) 4
SCC 108 has held in paragraph no.16 which is reproduced
hereinafter :-
"16. Thus, the doctrine of delay and laches should
not be lightly brushed aside. A writ court is required
to weigh the explanation offered and the
acceptability of the same. The court should bear in
mind that it is exercising an extraordinary and
equitable jurisdiction. As a constitutional court it
has a duty to protect the rights of the citizens but
simultaneously it is to keep itself alive to the
primary principle that when an aggrieved person,
without adequate reason, approaches the court at
his own leisure or pleasure, the Court would be
under legal obligation to scrutinize whether the lis
at a belated stage should be entertained or not. Be it
noted, delay comes in the way of equity. In certain
circumstances delay and laches may not be fatal but
in most circumstances inordinate delay would only
invite disaster for the litigant who knocks at the
doors of the Court. Delay reflects inactivity and
inaction on the part of a litigant - a litigant who has
forgotten the basic norms, namely, "procrastination
is the greatest thief of time" and second, law does
not permit one to sleep and rise like a phoenix.
Delay does bring in hazard and causes injury to the
lis"
15. Having considered the rival submissions made on
Patna High Court CWJC No.6030 of 2024 dt.26-03-2025
behalf of the parties and having perused the judgment dated
18.01.2024 passed in LPA No.727 of 2023 (arising out of
CWJC No.1414 of 2019), I find that the advertisement is of the
year, 2016, the result was published in the year, 2018 and
thereafter few rounds of litigation were filed and finally, this
Court has granted relief to those candidates, who had
approached this Court in CWJC no.6259 of 2019 and CWJC
No.21219 of 2018 making it clear in Paragraph no.20 of
judgment dated 19.04.2023 passed in LPA No.650 of 2022
(supra).
16. The above judgment has been passed in respect of
those who had approached this Court much earlier and the
petitioner can only be held he was not conscious of his right and
remained indolent, which don't entitle them to claim the equity
with those candidates who have been granted relief.
17. I do not find merit in the present writ petition,
accordingly, the same is dismissed.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
chn/-
AFR/NAFR AFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 28.03.2025
Transmission Date NA
