IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC NO.3330 OF 2005 1. MD.FARROQUE, SON OF MD. SALIM, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE HATWARIA TOLA OFFICE, POST OFFICE AND POLICE STATION HARLAKHI, DISTRICT MADHUBANI 2. MD. SHAHID ANSARI, SON OF MD. KITAB ALI ANSARI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SORAHI, POLICE STATION BASOPATTI, DISTRICT MADHUBANI …………………………………………………………………………PETITIONERS VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DIRECTOR, PRIMARY EDUCATION, NEW SECRETARIAT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, PRIMARY EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA 4. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, MADHUBANI 5. THE BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER, BENIPATTI BLCOK AT AND POST OFFICE BENIPATTI, DISTRICT MADHUBANI ………………………………………………………………………RESPONDENTS ******* 3 03/01/2011 The petitioner no. 1 states that he has been appointed by the District Superintendent of Education vide memo no. 1395-1745 on 25.02.1975 and the petitioner no. 2 states that he was appointed by the District Superintendent of Education vide memo no. 334 dated 24.06.1973. Both were working the Middle School, Nazra under Benipatti block and Upper Primary School, Ghanghor under Babubarhi block in the district of Madhubani. The petitioners were not paid their salaries and were asked to produce their matriculation certificates. It is submitted that the petitioners were asked to appear before the Director, Primary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna with all their certificates vide 2 letter no. 868 dated 24.06.1983 and letter no. 560 dated 10.03.1989 and letter no. 560 dated 10.03.1989 as well as by memo no. 2048 dated 30.09.1991. The petitioners have filed this writ application claiming that they should be granted their salaries from the year on which the School was taken over i.e. 1976. The delay in filing the writ application has been explained by stating that they had appeared at various stages before the authorities concerned and their certificates were verified. It has also been stated that they have filed various representations for the payment of their salaries which were not disposed of by the concerned authorities. I find that this is an extreme case in which the petitioners have not taken any steps for pursuing their rights within a reasonable time. The fact that they had filed representations which were not disposed of does not appear to be quite convincing. The petitioners apparently were asked to produce their certificates for verification. It is not clear as to whether they had in fact appeared before the authorities concerned and produced their certificates. Since 30 years have elapsed, this Court cannot pass any orders in favour of the petitioners for the purposes of granting any relief to them. The petitioners however, can move the concerned authorities if they are so advised. 3 This writ application is thus dismissed. Anand ( Sheema Ali Khan, J. )