IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14206 of 2009 1. KAPILDEO SAHNI S/O LATE SHANKAR SAHAI VILL- JHITKAHIA, P.S- LAKHAURA, DISTT- EAST CHAMPARAN Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, EAST CHAMPARAN AT MOTIHRI 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, EAST CHAMPARAN AT MOTIHARI 4. THE ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR EAST CHAMPARAN AT MOTIHARI 5. THE OFFICER- INCHARGE, P.S-LAKAURA, DISTT- EAST CHAMPARAN ----------- 2. 09.11.2009 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State. The petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 22.11.2005 holding that his appointment on the post of Chaukidar was contrary to law and by an authority not competent to do so. The writ application has been filed nearly four years latter on 28.10.2009. There is no explanation of legal remedies being pursued explained in the writ application for this inordinate delay. In service matters the delay is vital when question of a third party right also arises in the meantime. In the earlier writ application the petitioner came with a claim for salary only. Learned Counsel submits that he petitioner was functioning as Chaukidar in two Panchayats namely Naurangia and Jhitkahia. His appointment at Naurangia vis a vis Aziz Miam has been found to be bad. The authorities had been directed by this Court on 23.3.1998 in CWJC No. 872 of 1996 to fill up the vacancy. The petitioner is therefore eligible for appointment on the post of Chaukidar in Jhitkahia. Counsel for the State submits that the impugned order contains an observation to that effect. Additionally, the question arises as to what intervening developments may have taken place in this four years with regard to the post of Chaukidar in Jhitkahia. Only in the event of existing vacancy and the decision of the District Magistrate to make appointment as a policy matter, can the case of the petitioner may be considered. This Court disposes of this writ application upholding the objection raised on behalf of the State with the only observation that if appointments are to be made and the petitioner applies, he is otherwise found eligible, the authorities may consider the issue of relaxation of age and experience of the petitioner also. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)