IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13438 of 2008 Ram Chandra Gope son of Late Lahwar Yadav, Resident of Gaya Town, Police Station Muffacil, District Gaya…………………………………………………....Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar. 2. The Chief Secretary, State of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna. 3. The Secretary, Primary and Secondary Education, Human Resources Department, Bihar, Patna. 4. The Director, Primary Education, H.R.D. Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 5. The Director, Secondary Education, H.R.D. Department, Bihar, Patna. 6. The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Magadh Range, Gaya. 7. The District Education Officer, Gaya……………………………………….…………………………………….Respondents ---------- 2 14.11.2011 Admittedly, petitioner superannuated from service as Headmaster on 31.01.1992. It is his case that he had been given State Award for his meritorious service. Hence, prior to his superannuation, he submitted an application for extension of his services for one year. His last application was forwarded by the District Education Officer, Gaya, vide letter no.7303 dated 30.11.1991 (Annexure-7), to the Director, Secondary Education. The application of the petitioner remained pending. Hence, the District Education Officer, vide his letter no.13 dated 29.01.1992 (Annexure-8), asked petitioner 2 to continue in service but without salary, pending recommendation for extension of his service, which is the last communication which has been produced on record by the petitioner. Thereafter documents show that the petitioner applied for grant of benefits of the period of the said one year of service rendered by him, as directed by the District Education Officer, only in 2002. The said application of 2002 was considered by the Director, Secondary Education and was rejected vide order contained in Memo No.728 dated 22.04.2006 (Annexure-9). This communication is under challenge in this writ application. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon an order of this Court dated 10.11.1998 passed in CWJC No. 8686 of 1997, a copy whereof is annexed as Annexure-10. The said order shows that writ petitioner of that case had superannuated in 1993 and had applied for extension of his service which was rejected in July 1996 and the same was challenged by the petitioner in 1997. The 3 order shows that in June 1996 itself the State Government had withdrawn policy of extension of service on the basis of Award for meritorious service. Clearly, the said order of this Court was passed in view of the fact that the petitioner was proceeding in the matter and had approached this Court in time. The facts of the present case show that petitioner, even if acted on the assurance of the District Education Officer and worked for one year without salary, sat for almost ten years before approaching again the respondents in the year 2002 for grant of benefits of his working for one year in 1992-93 and upon rejection of the same in 2006, had filed a writ application in 2006. The writ application of the petitioner was disposed of with liberty to him to file a representation for consideration of his claim. The said claim was rejected by the respondents in 2006 itself, vide Annexure- 9 dated 23.03.2006 against which petitioner has filed this writ application in 2008. 4 Apparently, claim of the petitioner suffers from gross delay and laches. Hence, this Court does not consider it fit and proper to entertain the writ application on merits. The same is, accordingly, dismissed. BT (J. N. Singh, J.)