Satyendra Kumar Kushwaha And ANR v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6465 of 2018 ====================================================== 1.

Satyendra Kumar Kushwaha, Son of Shree Brajwasi Kushwaha, residence of Village Post- Mahdah, P.S. and District- Buxar. 2.

Amarjeet Kumar, Son of Shiv Shankar Mahto, residence of Village Post and P.S.- Udawant Nagar, District- Bhojpur Ara.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar through the Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna. 2.

The Deputy Inspector General Human Rights, Bihar, Patna. 3.

The Inspector General Bihar Military Police, Bihar, Patna. 4.

The Chairman Central Recruitment Board Cum-Additional Inspector General SCRB, Bihar, Patna.

5.

The Chairman Central Regional Board No.-1, Patna. 6.

The Chairman Central Regional Board No.-2, Patna. 7.

The Chairman Central Regional Board No.-3, Patna. 8.

The Chairman Magadh Regional Board No.-1, Gaya. 9.

The Chairman Shahabad Regional Board No.-1, Bhojpur. 10.

The Chairman Koshi Regional Board, Madhepura. 11.

The Chairman Tirhut Regional Board No. 1, Muzaffarpur. 12.

The Chairman North Division Board No.- 1, Muzaffarpur. 13.

The Chairman Saran Division Board, Chapra.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Surendra Kumar Singh, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Md.Nadeem Seraj (GP-5) Ms. Shalini (AC to GP-5) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 26-02-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for directing the respondent to appoint the petitioners as they are selected and participated in the test conducted for the post of Constable in the year 2006 under Advertisement No.1 of 2004, 2

Patna High Court CWJC No.6465 of 2018(3) dt.26-02-2024 2/2 of 2004 and 3 of 2004 and those matter travelled up to Hon'ble Division Bench in Letters Patent Appeal No.831 of 2009.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that after passing the order by the Hon'ble Division Bench, the series of persons were appointed by the State after 2011.

4. Learned counsel for the State submits that the cause of action for the petitioners has arisen if any in the year 2011 itself and since then he sat over the matter and file the writ petition only in the year 2018. In between, appointment on the post of Constable has been taken place series of times and all process have been completed.

5. In the light of the delay response made by the petitioners for whom cause of action has arisen in the year 2011 has opted to file the writ petition in the year 2018. As such, this Court is not inclined to grant any relief to the petitioners and this writ petition is not entertainable after delay of such a long period.

6. With the aforesaid observations, this writ petition is hereby dismissed.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.) Divyansh/- U