IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.636 of 2003 1. Shyam Bihari Srivastava, Son of Sri Krishna Murari Lal Srivastava, Clerk, Jaya Prabha Hospital and Research Centre, Kankarbagh, Patna-20. 2. Uday Shankar Prasad, Son of Sri Asheshwar Prasad, Clerk, Jaya Prabha Hospital and Research Centre, Kankarbagh, Patna-20. -------- Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Commissioner and Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. Director in Chief, Health Services, Bihar, Patna. 4. The Superintendent, Rajendranagar Hospital, Patna-16. -------- Respondents ----------- 3 23.07.2010 I.A. No. 5696 of 2010 Having taken into account the averments made in this application and for the reasons indicated therein, the widow of the petitioner no.1, namely, Sneh Lata Srivastava is directed to be substituted in place of the petitioner no.1 as the right to sue with regard to the claim of payment of salary of her husband would still survive. CWJC No. 636 of 2003 Heard Mr. Rajiv Lal, learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. Coming to the merit of this case, this Court must note that the prayer originally made in this writ application by the petitioners, read as follows:- “1(I) For issuance of a direction to the respondents to grant the pay scale 2 and post of the petitioner, which they were drawing and holding just before taking over the hospital.” Such prayer would suggest that the petitioners initially were working in the same institution and seeking protection of the pay-scale of that institution when it was made a government institution. In that regard, this Court will have to necessarily go into the history of take over and once that is examined, it would be found that such event had taken place in the year 1990 when the petitioners’ salary of Rs. 1400-2300/- and Rs. 1320-2040/- were reduced to Rs. 1200- 1800/-. This event took place definitely in the year 1990 but the writ application was filed only on 14.1.2003 and therefore, the delay of almost more than ten years only in moving this Court for claiming monetary benefit is rejected on the ground of delay and laches. This Court would additionally find that the Government, at the time of taking over, had fixed some terms and conditions and one of such condition was screening of service and thereafter taking over services 3 of only those persons possessing requisite qualification. If that exercise was undergone in case of the petitioners also while taking over of the hospital, this cannot be said that the petitioners’ pay scale was reduced. The Government is not bound to pay the salary to the employees of a private institution unless there be a clear stipulation in the Takeover Act or Scheme for protecting the earlier post and salary. That being so, this Court would not find any merit in this writ application and the same is dismissed accordingly. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)