Mohammad Gaffar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1319 of 2022 ====================================================== Mohammad Gaffar S/o Mo. Hussain, R/o Village-Nabi Nagar, P.O.-Piro, District-Bhojpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar.

2.

The Principal Secretary, General Administration Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4.

The Director Consolidation, Patna.

5.

The Deputy Director, Consolidation, Bhojpur.

6.

The District Magistrate, Bhojpur.

7.

The Deputy Collector, Rohtash.

8.

The State of Jharkhand through its Principal Secretary, General Administration Department, Ranchi.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shashi Bhushan Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Sheo Shankar Prasad, SC- 8 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 16-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner has filed the instant application for the following reliefs:

"1. (i) To direct the Respondent Authority to pay the benefits of A.C.P. to the petitioner.

(ii) To further direct the Respondent Authority to grant the promotion on the post of Clerk, since 12.01.1973 and also grant all consequential benefits, the pension of the petitioner re-fixed, and pay

Patna High Court CWJC No.1319 of 2022(4) dt.16-03-2026 2/2 arrears of salary as well as pension.

And/or any other appropriate relief(s) to the petitioners for which they may be found entitle under the fact and circumstances of the case."

3. At the outset, it may be observed here that the petitioner who retired from service sometime in the year 2007 has moved this Court in the year 2022 praying for a direction to the respondents to grant promotion on the post of Clerk since 12.1.1973 and to grant all consequential benefits.

4. Without going into the facts of the case, it can only be observed here that the writ application is fit to be rejected on the ground of inordinate delay and latches.

5. The application is dismissed.

(Partha Sarthy, J) sauravkrsinha/- U