IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18075 of 2011 Bibhishan Choudhary Son of Late Ram Bahadur Choudhary, resident of Village and Post Office- Parsauni, Police Station- Dumra, District- Sitamarhi. -----------------Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Water Resources, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Special Secretary, Department of Water Resources, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. The Principal Secretary, Department of General Administration (earlier known as personnel and Administrative Reforms), Government of Bihar, Patna. 5. The Deputy Secretary, Department of Water Resources, Government of Bihar, Patna. 6. The Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department Motihari at present having the Headquarter at Balmiki Nagar, District- West Champaran. -----------Respondents 1st Set. 7. Sri Sudama Mahto Son of not known to the petitioner at present posted at Assistant in the Department of Rural Development, Government of Bihar, Patna. 8. Sri Rama Kant Sharma son of not known to the petitioner posted as Assistant the Department of Co-operative, Government of Bihar, Patna. ----------------Respondents 2nd Set. 9. The State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary, Department of Water Resources, Nepal House, Ranchi. ----------------------Respondents 3rd Set. ---------------------------------- 2. 15.10.2011 Heard Mr. Jitendra Kumar Roy for the petitioner, Mr. Dhruba Mukherjee for the respondent no. 9 and learned A.C. to S.C. 4 for respondents no. 1 to 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has wrongly been placed lower in the list of Typists issued by the respondents in the final 2 gradation list dated 26.6.2002 as contained in Annexure- 4 to the writ petition for the reason that though he had better marks than other persons, still the authorities have finalized the gradation contrary to Annexure-1 which is the recommendation of the Bihar Public Service Commission based on marks obtained by them in the competitive test. He submits that after the publication of the final gradation list he has also filed his objection and subsequently, in the year 2006, his service was allocated to the State of Jharkhand though with effect from 15.11.2000. He submits that the authorities are sitting over his representation against the said final gradation list and which they are obliged to consider and pass appropriate order. Learned counsel for the State of Jharkhand on the other hand raises a preliminary objection that this writ petition is not maintainable before this Court since the petitioner after 2006 has been posted in Jharkhand and has also finally superannuated form Jharkhand and thus the appropriate forum to agitate the matter would be the Jharkhand High Court. He further submits that challenge is to the final gradation list of the year 2002 and after 9 years this Court would not interfere with the same since in service matters the law is well settled that the matters which are settled by passage of time should 3 not be reopened no matter what the discrepancies since by conduct the person concerned is deemed to have acquiesced and accepted the position. He further submits that the scope of objection was only against publication of tentative gradation list which in the present case was published in the year 2001 and after the publication of the final gradation list in the year 2002 there is absolutely no scope of any person aggrieved to again file a representation or objection and the authorities were neither required to consider the same nor pass any orders thereon. The only remedy available to the petitioner was to move the High Court in writ jurisdiction for the redressal of his grievances. Considering the rival contentions, this Court is inclined to accept the submissions made by learned counsel for the State of Jharkhand. For the reasons aforesaid, this Court finds no merit in this writ petition which stands dismissed. Anand Kr. (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)