Guru Prasad Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10987 of 2026 ====================================================== Guru Prasad Singh S/O Late Ameer Singh, R/O Village Salha, Kalapahar, P.S. Jandaha, District Vaishali.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Department of Panchayati Raj, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The District Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur. 3.

The District Panchayati Raj Officer, Vaishali at Hajipur. 4.

The Additional District Magistrate Establishment cum Inquiry Officer, Vaishali at Hajipur.

5.

The Block Development Officer - Sahdei Buzurg, Vaishali. ... ... Respondent/s =================================================== === Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ravish Mishra, Advocate For the Respondent/s:

Mr. Anil Kumar Verma, AC to AAG 09 =================================================== === CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 27-07-2026 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for the State.

2. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition with the following reliefs:- "( ). For issuing writ in the nature of Certiorari i to the respondents (particularly to the Respondent No. 3), so that the illegal and arbitrary Memo No. 720, dated 07.09.2015. issued by the said respondent in relation to the withholding of the two salary increments of the petitioner is set aside and quashed with immediate effect, and the benefits of the same should be paid to the petitioner forthwith, along with accrued interests.

(ii). For seeking explanation must be sought

Patna High Court CWJC No.10987 of 2026(2) dt.27-07-2026 2/3 from the state respondents as they as per their own vested interests and in an whimsical manner have not considered the show cause filed by the petitioner along with the concerning evidences in relation to the charges framed against him. and have not conducted the inquiry in a proper and partial manner.

(iii). Further for also commanding the respondents for paying the benefits of the second ACP/MACP along with delayed interest to the petitioner from the time it was due till his date of superannuation which was in the year 2015.

(iv). For any other reliefs which the Hon'ble High Court thinks proper and fit in the facts and circumstances of this case."

3. Learned Counsel for the State has raised a preliminary objection that Annexure P/5 at page 15 is the impugned order. He further submits that this is basically a communication made by the District Panchayati Raj Officer, Vaishali dated 07.09.2015. He further submits that the communication cannot be challenged.

4. After perusal of the said order in which the communication of punishment order dated 15.09.2016 has been communicated to him in which deduction of two increments with cumulative effect has been imposed upon him. The said punishment has already been acted upon and the petitioner has not challenged the said order earlier. Now, after lapse of about 11 years, he is challenging the said order.

5. The present writ petition stands dismissed on the

Patna High Court CWJC No.10987 of 2026(2) dt.27-07-2026 3/3 ground of inordinate delay.

(Dr. Anshuman, J) Manshi/Ashwini U