Shakuntala Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11274 of 2025 ====================================================== Shakuntala Singh Wife of Late Prem Nath Singh, Resident of near Chakkar Maidan, South East of Chandmari, P.S.- Bhagwanpur, Disst.- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Road Construction Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Principal Secretary, Road Construction Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Engineer-in-Chief-Cum-Special Secretary, Road Construction Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

4.

The Chief Engineer, National High Ways Sub-Division, Road Construction Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

5.

The Zonal Chief Engineer, National High Ways Sub-Division, Road Construction Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 6.

The Superintending Engineer, National High Ways Circle, Road Construction Department, Muzaffarpur.

7.

The Executive Engineer, National High Ways Division, Road Construction Department, Muzaffarpur.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Siyaram Pandey, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Government Advocate (9) For BRPNNL :

Mr. Sanjiv Kumar, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GIRIJISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 21-07-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent.

2. This writ application has been filed by the petitioner for the following reliefs:

" i.....For issuance of a writ in the nature of writ of mandamus or an appropriate writ/writs, order/orders or direction/directions

2/4 commanding the respondents to make payment of compensation amount or increased amount due to time extension done in the said agreement due to the laches on the part of the respondents which is admittedly due for which the petitioner is legally entitled for as the work is already completed and the contract was terminated with regard to agreement no.

15 F2, year 1995-96 relating to work of National High Ways no. 28 K.M.498 of the construction of bridge situated in SultanNama under Muzaffarpur Circle with interest @12% per annum as well as the penal interest and the litigation cost.

And/or be pleased to pass such other order or orders which may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the husband of the petitioner had entered into an agreement with the respondent no.7 for construction of a bridge on National Highway No. 28 K.M.498 situated at Sultan-Nama under Muzaffarpur Circle vide agreement No. 15 F2-year 1995-96. Pursuant to the aforesaid agreement, the husband of the petitioner has completed the works allotted to him but due to laches on the part of the respondent, the said work could not be completed on time which caused extra financial burden upon the husband of the petitioner due to which, he sustained financial loss which would be evident from the letter No. 1753 dated 12.12.1999 issued by the respondent no. 7. He further submits

3/4 that the petitioner has filed several representations with respect to her claim before the concerned authority, but they cannot yield results for the petitioner till date. Being left with no option the petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing this writ application.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the petitioner has approached this Court after delay of 30 years from the date of cause and action, therefore, this writ application is time barred. Hence, this writ application may be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches alone.

5. This Court find substance in the argument advance by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

6. In such view of the matter, since, indisputably, the petitioner has approached this Court after 30 years without explaining the delay occurred in filing the present writ application, this Court is of the view that a person who slept over for almost three decades, even if, for her legitimate right should not be rewarded at any point of time or any belated stage, therefore, this writ application does not warrant any interference of this Court in exercise of powers conferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

8. Accordingly, this writ application is dismissed on

4/4 the ground of delay and laches.

(Girijish Kumar, J) nitu/- U