IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16182 of 2007 Lalan Prasad Singh, son of late Prem Lal Singh, resident of Village Jagdishpur Kothia, P.S. Tariyani, Dist. Sheohar, at present posted and working as an Assistant Teacher in Kamla Girl’s High School, Dumra, Dist. Sitamarhi. -----------Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Director, Secondary Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur. 4. The District Education Officer, Sitamarhi. 5. The Headmistress, Kamla Girl’s High School, Dumra, Sitamarhi, Dist. Sitamarhi. ----------- Respondents -------------------- 2 19.12.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner in this writ application has assailed an order dated 16.4.2004 rejecting his claim for payment of salary for the period 5.11.1973 to 30.4.1977. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that from the combined reading of the application of the petitioner dated 24.10.1973 and the resultant order of the provisional approval accorded by the Sub- Divisional Education Officer in his letter dated 3.12.1973, it would be well established that the petitioner’s first appointment in the school was made as untrained Science Graduate and only thereafter he had also become trained graduate on 6.6.1975 within 2 the allotted time. He would accordingly proceed to submit that the petitioner’s payment of salary from the fund of the Secondary Education Board as a teacher should have been allowed with effect from 24.10.1973 the date of his first appointment and not from the date 1.5.1977 as decided by the Secondary Education Board. In the considered opinion of this Court, this writ application is not only belated but, also wholly frivolous. The petitioner’s services as a teacher came to be approved by the Secondary Education Board way back by an order dated 8.12.1977 w.e.f. 1.5.1977. This aspect of the matter infact has been clearly explained in the impugned order wherein the representation of the petitioner dated 22.9.2003 seeking to raise a dispute of the year 1973 to 1977 for the first time has been rejected by informing the petitioner the consequence of the earlier order of his recognition of service dated 8.12.1977 by way of resultant decision for payment of his salary was under undertaken by the State Government only with effect from 1.5.1977. 3 In all fairness to the learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ application is itself wholly ill advised and misconceived and its filing ought to have been avoided. The petitioner’s cause of action if any was against that order of the Secondary Education Board dated 8.12.1977 by which his services were approved on 1.5.1977 with the consequential benefit of benefit of salary. If the petitioner had acquiesced his right by allowing the things to settle for a period of twenty-six years to be reckoned from 8.12.1977 when an order was passed by the Secondary Education Board recognizing his service only w.e.f. 1.5.1977 he cannot be allowed to indirectly assail that order by questioning the impugned order passed on 16.4.2004 while disposing of his representation dated 22.9.2003. That apart the order passed by the S.D.E.O. in a case of non governmental high school approving service of the petitioner, an untrained graduate was itself in teeth of statutory provisions incorporated in 1972 Rules and thus if that was not accepted by the Secondary Education Board in its order 4 dated 8.12.1977 and the petitioner's service for the purpose of payment of his salary was recognized only w.e.f. 1.5.1977 after he become a trained teacher of a recognized high school no error can be said to have been committed in rejecting the wholly belated and Stale claim put forward after 26 years by filing his representation. That being so, this application is wholly misconceived and is accordingly dismissed. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)