IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.718 of 2010 1. Hans Nath Dushadh @ Hans Nath Manjhi S/O Late Vijay Dushad R/O Vill.- Amarpur, P.S.- Darauli, Distt.- Siwan Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Director General Of Police Bihar 3. The Inspector General Of Police Home Guard, Division Muzaffarpur 4. The Superintendent Of Police Siwan 5. The District Magistrate Siwan 6. The Sub Divisional Magistrate Siwan 7. The Circle Officer Darauli Block, Distt.- Siwan 4/ 08/09/2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The relief sought by the petitioner is for quashing of the order dated 7.10.2003 which superannuates him from service on 10.8.2003. His claimed date of superannuation based on his date of birth is 30.6.2006. Learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously sought to persuade the Court to look into the counter affidavit urging that it does give him a cause of action insofar as the claim for having been wrongly denied the right to work and consequent salary be concerned. A remedy under Article-226 of the Constitution is discretionary in jurisdiction. Delay has been considered an important aspect in exercise of this discretionary power holding that it is not available to 2 those who may not have been vigilant and alert for the protection of their own rights and interests. The Court cannot stand by waiting for those who may wake up at their luxury to institute claims which may be outdated and stale at the cost of justice to those who are alert for the protection of their rights and seek to vindicate the same by approaching the Courts in time. Taking up stale claims after long years like the present with no explanation for delay can only be at the cost of asking those who have come to the Court in time seeking relief to stand by and wait. The Court is not persuaded to do so. The writ application is dismissed on grounds of delay and laches. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)