IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1383 of 2008 Mahanand Jha, S/o Shri Sharda Kant Jha, resident of village and P.O. Patuaha, P.S. Saharsa, District Saharsa at present working as Clerk in R.M. College, Saharsa (Bihar)………………………………………………………………………Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through its Secretary- cum-Commissioner, Human Resources Development Department, New Secretariate, Patna 2. Bhupendra Narayan Mandal University, Lalu Nagar, Madhepura District Madhepura. 3. Vice Chancellor, B.N. Mandal University, Lalu Nagar, Madhepura. 4. Registrar, B.N. Mandal University, Lalu Nagar, Madhepura. 5. Proctor, B.N. Mandal University Lalu Nagar, Madhepura. 6. Finance Officer, B.N. Mandal University, Lalu Nagar, Madhepura. 7. Principal, Rajendra Mishra College, Saharsa…………………………………………………….….Respondents ----------- 4 12.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondents. From Annexure-1 it appears that petitioner was appointed as Correspondence Clerk in Rajendra Mishra Mahavidalaya, Saharsa when the College was under private management. It is stated that the College was taken over and inspection of the said College was made and in the inspection report, name of the petitioner was included. However, no orders for payment 2 of his salary have been passed in favour of the petitioner till now. There is nothing on record to show that petitioner had been raising the claim throughout in the right earnest before the appropriate authority, except for a representation of 2007 annexed as Annexure-7 with the writ application. Learned counsel for the petitioner refers to paragraph 15 of the writ application wherein it is stated that in the counter affidavit filed by the University in CWJC No.4021 of 1995, name of petitioner was mentioned as working Correspondence Clerk in the college. On that basis learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case of the petitioner was under consideration. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State in this case. Learned counsel for the University submits that the College is a Fourth Phase Constituent College and name of the petitioner was not included in the report of Hon’ble Justice Agrawal Commission as non-teaching employee of the College. 3 In the circumstances, this Court does not find any merit in this application and it also finds that the writ application suffers from gross delay and laches. The same is, therefore, dismissed. BT (J. N. Singh, J.)