IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4420 of 2006 DR.SHASHI PRABHA PRASAD, wife of Dr. Saudagar Pandit, resident of Mohalla Ashok Nagar, Police Station- Begusarai, Town and District- Begusarai, at present posted as Medical Officer, Primary Health Centre, Barauni, District- Begusarai. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Health Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. Deputy Secretary, Department of Health & Family Welfare, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. Joint Secretary, In-charge, Personnel Pay Slip, Department of Finance, Government of Bihar, Patna. 5. Civil Surgeon, Begusarai. 6. Medical officer, In-charge, Primary Health Centre, Barauni, District- Begusarai. … Respondents. ----------- 6. 13.08.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. This writ petition was initially filed on 3.4.2006 for the following relief; “1. That this application is being filed for issue of an appropriate writ commanding/directing the respondents to pay the arrears of salary of the petitioner since 8.2.2002 till date with interest at the rate of 18% per annum thereon since the date of its accrual and for a further direction to pay current salary regularly every month and for an ad interim order being passed directing the respondents to pay the entire arrears of salary as well as current salary regularly during the pendency of this writ application and for grant of such other relief/reliefs which the petitioner be found entitled to.” During the pendency of this writ petition, the 2 payment of salary of the petitioner as admissible has already been made which is clear from the averments made in the counter affidavit filed by respondents on 1.11.2006 and also a separate counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no. 4 on 2.8.2007 annexing the pay slip of the petitioner as also proof of sending such pay slip to the petitioner through Civil Surgeon of the District. An Interlocutory Application has also been filed by the petitioner for amendment in the prayer of the writ petition by way of a further relief namely, “the service of the petitioner for the period 24.4.1996 to 7.2.2002 be regularized and cost be awarded”. Counsel for the petitioner would submit that this prayer is in fact only consequential and/or analogous and as such this Court may allow the petitioner to amend the prayer of the writ petition. In the opinion of this Court, the prayer of the petitioner in this writ petition was confined to only payment of admissible salary and now the prayer for regularization of the period from 24.4.1996 for which a cause of action had arisen at least 10 years back, cannot be allowed to be at least raised in this writ petition. An amendment of prayer in any pleading including in the writ 3 petition can only be allowed if that is incidental but the present prayer of regularization of his service being far from being incidental and being altogether different and separate cannot be agitated in this writ application. Counsel for the State has also submitted that in the aforesaid period of 24.4.96 to 7.2.2002 the petitioner was actually unauthorisedly absent and a departmental proceeding for the aforesaid misconduct is under way. The Counsel for the petitioner however has feigned ignorance to the aforesaid stand of the learned counsel for the State. Be that it may, if a departmental proceeding for absence of duty for the period in question is underway his prayer for regularization of service cannot be allowed. However, this Court would not like to record any final opinion on this score inasmuch as this Court is not inclined to allow the amendment sought in the I. A. No. 4517 of 2007. That being so, this writ petition on account of grant main relief as originally prayed in this writ petition by the Respondents has become infructuous and is, accordingly, dismissed. kanchan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)