IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.1571 of 2009 MUNNI LAL RAJAK, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, S/O LATE MAHABIR RAJAK, R/O VILL.- AJAYPOR, P.S.- NURSARAI, DISTT.- NALANDA, BIHAR SHARIF, AT PRESENT POSTED AS EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, FLOOD CONTROL DIVISION-3, ANISHABAD, PATNA-2 … Petitioner/ Appellant Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE SECRETARY, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY-CUM-COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL & ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE JOINT SECRETARY (MANAGEMENT CELL), WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE DEPUTY SECRETARY (VIGILANCE), WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 5. THE CHIEF ENGINEER WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 6. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, WATER RESOURCES DEPTT., GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA … Respondents/Respondents. ----------- 3. 13.5.2010 I.A.No. 8152/2009 Having heard learned counsel for the appellant as also taking into consideration the facts and circumstances mentioned herein, the delay of 134 days in filing of this appeal is hereby condoned. I.A.No. 8152/2009 is accordingly allowed. L.P.A.No. 1571/2009 Since we have condoned the delay we have also inclined to take up the appeal for its disposal at the 2 admission stage itself. In this intra-Court appeal the appellant- writ petitioner has assailed the order dated 22.6.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C.No. 6898/2009 dismissing his writ petition relating to an order of punishment of Censure dated 12.7.2006 on the ground of its being filed almost after a period of three years. Mr. D.K.Sinha, learned Senior counsel for the appellant, has tried to explain that as the appellant- writ petitioner is still in service, the order of punishment even by way of Censure should have the adverse effect on his career and as such, the learned Single Judge ought to have decided the writ petition on merit in stead of dismissing it on the ground of delay. In the opinion of this Court the effect of Censure is only for a period of three years and therefore, after the effect of such order of punishment had already been completed no purpose could have been achieved in making an academic exercise as the clock could not have been reversed by interfering with the order of punishment. The delay thus being in this case fatal, as the effect of punishment of Censure has already been 3 completed in the meantime, the learned Single Judge was perfectly justified in dismissing the writ application on the ground of unexplained delay and laches on the part of the appellant- writ petitioner. That being so, we find no merit in this appeal and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. (Dipak Misra,C.J.) (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/