IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.1575 of 2010 In (CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE 236/2010) 1. Ram Bali Singh, S/O Sri Ishwar Dayal Singh, R/O Vill.- Parari, P.S.- Kudra, Distt.- Rohtas, at Present Posted as Assistant Engineer, NREP, Madhepura in the Road Construction Department (Old PWD), Bihar, Patna……………….Appellant. Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Road Construction Department Technical Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna 2. The Deputy Secretary to Government, Road Construction Department, Vishwasharaiya Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna 3. The Secretary of Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department , Government Of Bihar, Patna, Old Secretariat, Bihar, Patna 4. The Engineer in Chief-cum-Additional Commissioner-cum- Special Secretary, Road Construction Department Technical Secretariat, Vishweshwaraiya Bhawan, Patna 5. The Finance Commissioner, Government of Bihar, Patna …….Respondents For the petitioner : Mr. Khurshid Alam, Advocate For the State : Mr. Suman Kumar Jha, AC to AAG-5 ------------------ 3. 05.12.2011 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State. The Writ Court has considered the claim of the appellant/writ petitioner for shifting the date of his promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer from 1998 to 1993 and finding that cause of action arose long year in the year 1998 to 1999 when some others were granted promotion with effect from 1993 and the fact that writ petition was filed after considerable delay in 2010 refused to consider the writ petition 2 on merits. The same has been dismissed on the ground of unexplained and inordinate delay. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that in service matters such cause of action as the appellant has is a recurring cause of action and does not affect any interest of third parties. We do not agree with the aforesaid submissions because if the writ petitioner/appellant was denied promotion from 1993 and granted only from 1998, as far back as in the year 1998 he had immediate cause of action and if somebody else wrongly got promotion with effect from 1993 things could have been easily corrected then. At this belated stage, in matters of promotion rights of third parties come into play and hence delay of more than a decade, in our view, does not entitle the appellant for consideration of his claim on merits. We find no merit in this appeal. It is, accordingly, dismissed. Mkc/ (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (Shivaji Pandey, J.)