← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/16877/2024dismissed

Chandra Mohan Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

2024-10-30Mr. Justice Nani Tagia2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16877 of 2024 ====================================================== Chandra Mohan Thakur, aged about 64 years, Son of Deonandan Thakur Resident of Village- New Khajasarai, Near Railway Overbreez, PostLaheriasarai and P.S.- Laheriasarai, District- Darbhanga ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Law, Government of Bihar, Patna 2.

The Principal Secretary, Department of Law, Government of Bihar, Patna 3.

The District Judge, Darbhanga 4.

The Judge-in-Charge, Nazarat, Darbhanga 5.

The District and Sessions Judge, Darbhanga 6.

The Judge-in-Charge (Administration), Civil Court, Darbhanga ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms. Madhumala Kumari, Advocate Mr. P.K. Thakur, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Mithilesh Kumar Upadhayay, Advocate Mr. Piyush Lal, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NANI TAGIA ORAL ORDER 30-10-2024 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. This writ petition has been filed challenging the Order dated 03.07.1997, contained in Memo No. 54-56/N., passed in Order No. 15 N. of 1997, by the District Judge, Darbhanga, whereby the next three annual increments after the last increment allowed to the petitioner have been withheld.

3. The petitioner at the relevant time was stated to be a peon in the Office of Civil Court, Darbhanga. The petitioner is now stated to have retired on 30.09.2020.

4. Having taken note of the fact that the order

Patna High Court CWJC No.16877 of 2024(2) dt.30-10-2024 2/2 impugned is of the year 1997 while the petitioner was a peon in the Civil Court, Darbhanga and now the petitioner has retired from service on 30.09.2020, I am of the view that there is an inordinate delay in filing the present writ petition.

5. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed on the ground of delay and laches.

(Nani Tagia, J) Nilmani/- U