IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1331 of 2010 ARVIND KUMAR SINHA Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 02 26.07.2010 The petitioner who retired from service on 30.9.2003 was proceeded with departmentally and punishment imposed in 1993 against which he filed an appeal in 1994. Learned counsel for the petitioner sought to persuade this Court that the order of punishment in 1993 was itself illegal, inasmuch as there had been no departmental proceedings in accordance with law. He however very fairly acknowledges that the writ petition does not contain any explanation for what steps were taken by the petitioner after he filed an appeal in service in 1994 till his superannuation. Even after the superannuation for seven long years he did not take recourse to any proceedings and has offered no explanation whatsoever in the writ application for this delay. Learned counsel submits that opportunity may be given to the petitioner to file a fresh copy of his appeal of 1994 before the Appellate authority. Learned counsel for the State submits that the writ application is barred by gross and unexplained 2 delay. It may not be possible for the State to re-consider such stale matters when tracing out such old records may not be feasible. He relies upon a judgment of the Supreme Court in 2008 (10) SCC 115 (C.JACOB VERSUS DIRECTOR OF GEOLOGY AND MINING AND ANOTHER) to contend that even if the petitioner was to file a fresh copy that shall not condone the earlier delay, and even if any fresh orders are passed in appeal it shall not vest a fresh cause of action in the petitioner. The stand of the State is unexceptionable. The writ application is fit to be dismissed in limine on grounds of gross inordinate delay. However, if the petitioner wishes to file a fresh copy of his appeal stated to have been preferred in 1994, the State in its wisdom is not precluded from considering the same. This Court does not issue any directions to that effect. However any orders passed therein shall not vest a fresh cause of action in the petitioner to approach this Court as the earlier delay of his part shall not stand condoned in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in C. Jacob (supra). The application stands disposed. P.K. (Navin Sinha, J.)