IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13723 of 2010 1. BHULETAN SINGH S/O LATE RAM LAL SINGH R/O VILL.- NARYANPUR, P.O. DAWAT, DISTT.- ROHTAS Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE-CUM-CHAIRMAN DISTRICT EDUCATION ESTABLISHMENT COMMITTEE, ROHTAS AT SASARAM. 3. THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, PATNA DIVISION, PATNA. 4. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, PATNA DIVISION, PATNA. 5. THE AREA EDUCATION OFFICER, BIKRAMGANJ, Rohtas. ----------- 2. 11.04.2011 Annexure-1 is the outcome of an earlier round of litigation initiated at the behest of the petitioner. Reflection of the existence of Annexure-1 is also evident from the order passed in contempt application which is Annexure-2. Annexure-1 is dated 27.10.2003. Petitioner retired years ago and now he challenges the impugned order. If the order was not palatable to him he should have moved the Court within a reasonable time frame. There is no clear indication in the writ application as why he choose to sit over the order for 7 years and challenge it now when all things have been allowed to rest including settlement of retrial dues. The only explanation offered is that he has been filing representations. The Court only needs to remind the petitioner that the speaking 2 order has been passed at the behest of the High Court way back in the year 2003. There is no reason why the petitioner ought not to have challenged the order well in time. This is misplaced kind of writ where issues were settled years ago. The Court is not inclined to show indulgence in this matter and reopen the same after so many years. This writ application is dismissed in the circumstances mentioned above. Anand Kr. (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)