- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.920 of 2005 Ramjee Prasad son of Late Raja Ram Sahu, Additional District Magistrate (since retired), resident of 17, Adarsha Colony, Shrikrishna Nagar, Patna-800001. . . . . . Petitioner/Appellant. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, Bihar Old Secretariat, Patna. 2. The Member, Board of Revenue, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna. 3. The Additional Secretary to the Government, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, Bihar Old Secretariat, Patna. 4. The Joint Secretary to the Government, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, Bihar Old Secretariat, Patna. 5. The Under Secretary to the Government, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, Bihar Old Secretariat, Patna. 6. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna-800001. 7. The Senior Accounts Officer, Office of the Accountant General (A and E) II, Bihar, Birchand Patel Path, Patna-800001. . . . . . . Respondents/Respondents. ------------ 4. 03.12.2010. None appears on behalf of the appellant. Mr. Shashi Bhushan Kumar, learned S.C. 16, appears for respondent nos. 1 to 5. The petitioner of C.W.J.C. No. 6928 of 2002 (Ramjee Prasad Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.), has preferred this appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of the High Court of Judicature at Patna, and raises a grievance with respect to the order dated 07.07.2005, passed by a learned Single judge of this Court, whereby his writ petition for grant of time-bound promotion has been rejected. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. It appears to us that the petitioner superannuated from the service of the Government of Bihar with effect from 28.2.1998, and the writ petition was filed in this Court on 26.06.2002, after lapse of more than 4 years, for the relief of grant of time-bound promotion which was rejected on the - 2 - ground of unexplained delay. We entirely agree with the reason assigned by learned Single judge in dismissing the writ petition. There is no merit in this appeal. It is accordingly dismissed. (S.K.Katriar,J). Shashi. (S.P.Singh,J).