IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14611 of 2005 SHEO BACHAN PD.SHRIVASTAVA Versus THE PATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS ----------- For the petitioner: Mr. Narendra Nath Ojha For the respondents: M/S Chandra Shekhar and Poonam Kumari Singh --------- 03. 28.07.2008 Petitioner retired from service in the year 1998. Thereafter he approached the respondent authorities to remove anomaly in his pay on the post of Inoculator from 1.1.1986 and in this regard though he claims that he had filed representation before the respondents in the year 1991 but he decided to assert his right by way of annexure-18 only on 27.9.2005. The reason why the petitioner got enthused to file the present writ petition is because the respondent Corporation in terms of a direction issued by the High Court decided to give certain benefit to one Kishori Mahto. The Court is not inclined to entertain the writ application in a case where the petitioner has been negligent or lax in asserting his right when proper time frame was available to him. It would amount to encouraging stale issues more than 20-30 years old only because retired employees have all the time and may be money to bring such matters before the Court at their convenience for adjudication, spurred by some advantage in relation to a colleague in whose case appropriate order came to be passed at the relevant point of time. The writ application is dismissed. This order will not come in the way of the petitioner if he wants to convince the respondents to give relief. rkp (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) - 2 -