IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.835 of 2011 In (CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE 5639/2011) Yogesh Nandan Mandal son of Late Hirday Narayan Mandal, resident of village – Nirpur, PO+PS Baryarpur, District Munger ....Appellant Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through the Director of Agriculture, Government of Bihar, Patna 2. The Director of Agriculture, Government of Bihar, Patna 3. The Under Secretary, Personal Claim Fixation Cell, Government of Bihar, Patna 4. The Agriculture Production Commissioner, Government of Bihar, Patna .....Respondents ---------------------------------- 4 30-09-2011 Heard the parties. The writ court has dismissed appellant’s writ petition after noticing his grievance in respect of non grant of time bound promotion and benefits of Assured Career Progression Scheme and the fact that he retired from service on 31-7-2003, mainly on the ground that the claims required revision of pay scale since 1984 and the petitioner chose to sit over the matter for long eight years even after retirement. We are in agreement with the views of the writ court that stale matters should not be opened in exercise of writ jurisdiction when there is no good 2 justification for unusual delay. However, in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondents, it has been stated in paragraph 6 that notwithstanding the dismissal of writ petition, the department is still ready to show good gesture and if the petitioner co-operates by furnishing/ producing evidence with regard to passing of departmental examination, which is not available on the record of department, then the grievance of the appellant, if found bonafide, may be considered. In our view, the appellant has been given sufficient opportunity by the department to approach the authorities with the materials which they require. It goes without saying that if the appellant approaches the concerned authorities with the required materials, they are expected to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law at an early date, preferably, within six months. It is made clear that this observation is only on account of good gesture shown by the respondents and this shall not entitle the appellant to plead that 3 issue of delay has been condoned by this court. The appeal is disposed of. BKS/- (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (Shivaji Pandey, J.)