IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6460 of 2011 Syed Muznabin Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors ----------- 02. 4.8.2011 All the effort or exercise done by the petitioner amounts to nothing in the set of facts noted below. Petitioner retired in the year 1991 from the post of Junior Research Assistant, in the department of Agriculture. Many years after his retirement, he filed an application in the year 1998 asking for exemption from sitting in the departmental examination. He moved the court in the year 2001 with a grievance that his representation is not being decided and it has consequence for him. A direction was issued to the respondents to decide, which was done as would be evident from the order passed in the contempt application. Respondents have rejected his claim which is dated 7.1.2010. This order is under challenge as Annexure-13 to the writ application. Submission of the counsel for the petitioner is that the reason for rejection of the claim of the petitioner is not cogent and may not be in terms of the circular in this regard. The Court has gone to the concluding part of the finding given by the Agriculture Production Commissioner. He seems to be correct in his stand that grant of exemption from appearing in the departmental examination has to relate to the 2 time and the date when it is granted. Admittedly, petitioner retired in the year 1991. What benefit should accrue now to the petitioner 20 years down the line is not appreciated by this Court because obviously he is looking for increments which were not granted to him when he was in service due to non- passing of the departmental examination. The other aspect which has been taken note of in the impugned order is that petitioner sat for examination only twice in 1979 and 1980. He remained in service till 1991. There is nothing to indicate as to why he did not have a go at the departmental examination thereafter. Respondents have done the correct thing by rejecting the claim of the petitioner. This Court is not inclined to allow such a stale claim which has lost its meaning. Writ has no merit. It is dismissed. Annexure-13 is in consonance with the circular on this count. rkp ( Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)