IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6073 of 2008 1. AJAY KUMAR, S/O SHRI RADHA KRISHNA PRASAD, R/O VILLAGE-BHAIRSAHI, P.O.-PADARKHAP, P.S.-BHAIROGANJ, DISTRICT-WEST CHAMPARAN. 2. JAI PRAKASH BAITHA, S/O SHRI PHULCHAND BAITHA, R/O VILLAGE-SHIVRAJPUR, P.O.- PADARKHAP, P.S.-BHAIROGANJ, DISTRICT-WEST CHAMPARAN. 3. SHAMBHU YADAV, S/O SHRI SHEOPUJAN YADAV, R/O VILLAGE-HARPUR, P.O.-HARPUR, P.S.- BHAIROGANJ, DISTRICT-WEST CHAMPARAN. ……………PETITIONERS. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, BETTIAH, WEST CHAMPARAN. 3. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION CUM DISTRICT PROGRAMME CONVENOR, BETTIAH, WEST CHAMPARAN. 4. SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER (S.D.O.), BAGAHA, WEST CHAMPARAN. 5. BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, BAGAHA, WEST CHAMPARAN. 6. MUKHIYA, GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ, BHAISAHI, PADARKHAP, BHAIROGANJ, WEST CHAMPRAN. ……………RESPONDENTS. ----------- 4 01.08.2011 The three petitioners have filed this writ application for a direction to the respondents with the following prayer :- That this application is being filed for issuance of an appropriate writ/writs commanding the respondent authorities to act upon them and object of the Government under the Panchayat Raj Act and also to appoint the petitioners on the post of Shiksha Mitra as their the only the suitable and eligible candidates for the post and further for a direction to authorities to take all the necessary steps to the objection raised by the petitioners in the light 2 of aim and object issued by the Government for the appoint of the Shiksha Mitra. As per the pleadings, some candidates were appointed in October, 2003 as Shiksha Mitras who were having lesser marks than the petitioners. The grievance of the petitioners is that after expiry of their terms, if process for fresh appointment would have been undertaken the petitioners would have been considered. There is nothing on record to show that against the engagement of some candidates in October, 2003 having lesser marks than the petitioners, they filed any complaint before any authority within the time stipulated in the Guidelines for filing such complaint. By enclosing some correspondences of 2005 and 2006 an attempt has been made in the writ application to show that the matter was under consideration before the respondents. The fact remains that the petitioners never filed their complaint within the time as per the Rules against such engagement of candidates, having lesser marks than the 3 petitioners, in October, 2003. They have straightaway come to this Court in 2008 i.e. almost after five years. In the circumstances, this Court finds that this writ application suffers from gross delay and laches and the same is therefore dismissed. Arvind/ ( J.N. Singh, J.)