IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11451 of 2003 LEELA DEVI wife of Late Hawaldar Ganesh Ishwar, resident of village-Bhamarupur (Bhamanpur) P.S. Samastipur (Mufassil) in the district of Samastipur. Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.The Inspector General of Police (Welfare) Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3.The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Purnea Range, Purnea. 4.The Superintendent of Police, Purnea. 5.The Oriental Insurance Company Limited through its Managing Director, A-25/27, Asaf Ali Road, New-DE LHI 110002. 6.The Manager, the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. C.B.O. IVth floor, Gangotri complex, Main Boring Road, Patna 800001. ----------- 3 18/1/2010 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. Prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows:- “For directing the respondents to make payment of Group Personal Accident Policy amount Rs.100000/- along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum to the petitioner.” Counsel for the petitioner would submit that husband of the petitioner while being in service of the police department had died in a road accident on 24.5.1993 while he was covered by the general policy taken by the Police department with the Oriental Insurance Company and the decision of the Oriental Insurance Company dated 28.3.1995 rejecting claim for payment of 2 the insured amount for the death of husband of the petitioner is unsustainable on facts and in law. Counsel for the petitioner, however, when asked as to the cause of action of the year 1993-95 and the delay in filing of the writ application by 8 to 10 years, was of the view that since the petitioner was all along filing the representations the delay will not come in her way. Counsel for the Oriental Insurance Company, on the other hand, relies on the judgment of this Court in the case of „Smt. Lilabati Devi Vs. State of Bihar & Ors‟ reported in 1998 (2) P.L.J.R.652, wherein exactly similar question was decided holding therein that the claim for payment by the Insurance Company having expired in the year 1994 itself no direction could be issued for such payment. Counsel for the petitioner, in fact, seems to be aware of the aforementioned judgment, but he has still pressed this writ application for a direction to the Insurance Company for payment of insured amount. However, when this Court had indicated that the writ application both on account of unexplained delay and laches on the part of the petitioner as also the law having been settled in the case of Lilabati Devi (Supra) was not in a position to grant relief to the petitioner, he has submitted that a similar direction be issued as was given in 3 paragraph 8 in the case of Lilabati Devi (Supra). In the opinion of this Court, when it has been found that the writ application suffers from the vice of unexplained delay and laches no direction can be given in this regard, but then if the petitioner would find that on the representation filed by her the authorities of the police department could give her amount, dismissal of this writ application will not come in the way of the petitioner in claiming such amount. With the aforementioned observation this application is, accordingly, dismissed. Abhay Kumar (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)