IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15945 of 2009 1. RAM KISHORE PRASAD SINGH S/O SHIVA NANDAN SINGH VILL & P.O. KATARI, P.S. SHEIKHPURA, DISTT. SHEIKHPURA, AT PRESENT POSTED AT OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NATIONAL HIGH WAY, ROAD DIVISION, SITAMARHI, DISTT. SITAMARHI (BIHAR) Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE COMMISSIONER DEPTT. OF FINANCE, BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE SECRETARY ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPTT., GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE ENGINEER-IN-CHIEF-CUM-ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER-CUM-SPECIAL SECRETARY ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPTT., BIHAR, PATNA 5. THE ENGINEER-IN-CHIEF-CUM-SPECIAL SECRETARY RURAL ENGINEERING ORGANISATION, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 6. THE CHIEF ENGINEER RURAL ENGINEERING ORGANISATION-II, NORTH BIHAR, PATNA 7. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER RURAL ENGINEERING ORGANISATION WORK CIRCLE, DARBHANGA (NORTH BIHAR) 8. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER RURAL ENGINEERING ORGANISATION, WORK DIVISION, SAMASTIPUR, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR 9. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER RURAL ENGINEERING ORGANISATION, WORKS DIVISION, MOTIHARI, DISTT. MOTIHARI 10. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPTT., ROAD DIVISION, JAMUI 11. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPTT., ROAD DIVISION, BHAGALPUR 12. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT FUND OFFICER SARI, DISTT. GIRIDIH (JHARKHAND) 13. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER DUMRA, DISTT. SITAMARHI 14. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER PARIHAR, DISTT. SITAMARHI ----------- 2/ 23/12/2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The claim in this writ application is against an order dated 18.11.2000 with regard to grant of time bound promotion from the wrong date as also for certain benefits of A.C.P. Learned counsel for the State raised objection that the petitioner had come to this Court earlier in CWJC No. 13463 of 2003 when he did not raise the aforesaid grounds notwithstanding that they were available to him. The writ application is, therefore, barred by constructive res judicata. Moreover, the petitioner has rushed to this Court without even 2 approaching the authority first apart from the claim being stale. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the order in CWJC No. 13463 of 2003 has been complied in part only but fairly acknowledges not having filed any contempt proceeding. In so far as the order dated 18.11.2000 is concerned, the submission is that he proposes to submit a representation. This writ application is disposed with observation that if the petitioner submits a representation, this Court expects the Respondents to consider the same expeditiously. Any order passed by the authorities on such representation shall remain circumscribed by the pronouncement of the Supreme Court in the case of C. Jacob v. Director of Geology & Mining & anr.), (2008) 10 SCC 115 in so far as the remedies of the petitioner against such order be concerned. AKS/ ( Navin Sinha, J.)