IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3323 of 2010 1. Baldeo Rai S/O Late Palat Rai R/O Vill.- Sivrahan Basudeo, P.O.- Jhapaha, Gram Panchayat- Jhapaha Manjhaulia, P.S.- Ahiyapur, Block- Bochaha, Distt.- Muzaffarpur Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Director Directorate Of Panchayat Raj, Government Of Bihar, Patna 3. The District Magistrate Muzaffarpur 4. The Deputy Development Commissioner Muzaffarpur 5. The District Panchayat Officer Muzaffarpur 6. The Secretary, Bihar Staff Selection Commissioner P.O.- Veterinary College, Patna 3/ 06/09/2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The relief sought in this application is for a direction to take a final decision on the letter of the District Panchayat Officer, Muzaffarpur dated 15.7.2008 for correcting the date of birth and educational qualification of the petitioner and then to publish a final gradation list for promotion to the post of Panchayat Sevak from that of a Dalpati. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after appointment as a Dalpati in 1981 as approved in 1982, in the year 1989 the petitioner improved his educational qualification from middle pass to that of Pravesika from Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar. On 26.11.1990 he submitted a representation before the authorities in light of certain orders of this Court when the respondents were considering persons for 2 appointment as Panchayat Sevaks from Dalpati and requested for entering his advanced educational qualifications in his service records for that purpose and also requested for rectification of his date of birth in the service records. The submission therefore is that directions may be given to dispose the representation in accordance with law. The respondents have filed a counter affidavit raising issues that he appeared for the Pravesika examination without permission. The counter affidavit is of no help in adjudication. On the own showing of the petitioner, the cause of action accrued to him on 10.4.1996 when he requested to be considered for appointment based on his enhanced educational qualification. Yet he makes no grievance of it till he gives a representation more than 12 years later in 2008 and files this writ application in 2010. The delay remains completely unexplained. Even if this Court were to take into consideration that the date of birth beneficial to the petitioner is 8.11.1955, the petitioner would barely have four years of service left. The Court is not persuaded to interfere at this belated stage. The writ application is dismissed. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)