IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13434 of 2008 DINESH Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ----------- For the petitioner: Mr. Gajendra Kumar Jha Mr. Surya Kant Mishra For the respondent nos. 1 to 7 : Mr. Bijoy Kumar Sinha --- P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice And Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal --- Dated, the 8th September, 2008 We heard the counsel for the petitioner. 2. The Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench in O.A. No.657 of 2007, considered the matter thus: “4. In the OA the applicant has alleged that the applicant has filed several representations from time to time, but the respondents have not taken any decision. It is settled law that the repeated representation does not enhance the limitation period. 5. We have given our anxious consideration to the plea raised by the applicant and the reasons given in the impugned order. We do not find any illegality in the impugned order. The reason is that the alleged junior, Prabhu earned promotions prior to the applicant. At that point of time the applicant did not pursue for redressal of his grievances. Possibly, there was no valid legal ground for the applicant to do so. Thus, the claim of the applicant is also barred by delay and laches. We are of the opinion that the claim of the applicant is liable to be rejected on merits as well as delay and laches. Accordingly, the OA is dismissed. No order as to costs.” 3. We find ourselves in agreement with the view of the 2 Tribunal. 4. No case for interference is made out. 5. Writ petition is dismissed in limine. R. M. Lodha, CJ. Kishore K. Mandal, J. Neyaz/