IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9887 of 2006 DR.BASANT KUMAR THAKUR, SON OF SRI RAMDEO THAKUR, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SIMARHADKALA, P.O. NARHA, P.S. MEJORGANJ, VIA RIGA, DISTRICT SITAMARHI, AT PRESENT POSTED AS LECTURER, ROG VIGYAN BIBHAG, RAJKIYA AYODHYA SHIV KUMARI, AYURVED COLLEGE, BEGUSARAI…………………….PETITIONER VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE SECRETARY, HEALTH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, PATNA, BIHAR 2. THE DEPUTY SECRETARY, HEALTH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT AND DESHI CHIKITSA DEPARTMENT, PATNA, BIHAR. 3. THE DIRECTOR, DESHI CHIKITSA, HEALTH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, PATNA, BIHAR. 4. SPECIAL SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA…………………………………………………RESPONDENTS *** 5. 16.12.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Petitioner has filed this writ application for a direction to the respondents to grant him continuity of his service between the period 27.07.1994 to 30.09.1994 and pay salary of the period as he had discharged his duty at the place of posting prior to his proceeding for higher studies. He has prayed for a further direction to the respondents to grant him study leave for the period 01.101994 to 28.06.1995 during which period he had pursued his higher study and for further direction to - 2 - allow petitioner full salary of the periods. The case of the petitioner is that after joining his service under the State Government on 27.07.1994, he submitted an application on 1.8.1994 for grant of leave for higher studies. It is his case that he waited for about two months and when he did not receive any letter of permission, he proceeded for pursuing higher studies on his own on 01.10.1994. He joined the Rajendra Ayurvedic College, Lucknow where he was paid stipend by the College. However, a paper notice was published by the State Government directing many doctors, who had proceeded on leave for higher studies without grant of leave, to join within 15 days of publication of the notice, failing which their appointments were to be cancelled. Petitioner’s name was also published in the newspaper. Coming to know of that, petitioner joined service within the stipulated 15 days and thereafter he continued in the service of the State Government. However, since the period during which he was pursuing his higher studies was not regularized, full salary of the petitioner of the said period was not paid in - 3 - terms of Sub-rule (1) of Rule 213 of the Bihar Service Code. He filed representation in the Department on 25.07.2006, a copy whereof is annexed as Annexure-9. No orders having been passed on the said representation, he filed this writ application. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that under the Rules of the Government of Bihar, petitioner was entitled for regularization of service of the period and full salary in view of the fact that he had undertaken higher studies and had acquired higher qualification of M.D. which was in public interest. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that petitioner was not granted study leave and he had proceeded unauthorisedly on leave for pursuing higher study. Therefore, he was not entitled for regularization of period and for salary thereof. He also submits that this writ application of the petitioner suffers from enormous delay and laches as petitioner has filed this writ application in 2006 i.e. more than ten years after he joined his service pursuant to the publication of paper notice. - 4 - Learned counsel for the petitioner, in reply, has submitted that petitioner was pursuing the matter in the Department which will be evident from Annexure-9 itself as the last representation filed by him mentions about earlier representation filed the petitioner. Learned counsel for the respondents has pointed out that there was no mention in Annexure-9 with regard to any other earlier representation and the annexure mentioned only with respect to the petition filed by petitioner on 01.02.2006 which is evident from Annexure-9 itself. Pursuing the matter for more than ten years in the Department by filing representations is not sufficient explanation for approaching this Court after such delay. There has to be a reasonable time limit for having legitimate expectation of consideration of his case by the authorities and it cannot be that an incumbent goes on filing representations in the Department for decades and then claims for condonation of delay in approaching this Court on that ground. This is also admitted that the leave of the petitioner was not granted and - 5 - on paper notice, on threat of his service being terminated, he joined back. In the circumstances, this Court does not find any merit in this writ application, specially on account of delay and laches caused on the part of petitioner in approaching this Court. Therefore, this writ application is dismissed. B.T (J. N. Singh, J.)