Heard Mr. Kumar Kaushik, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Bijoy Kr. Sinha representing the State as also Mr. Sriram Krishna, learned counsel appearing on behalf of NHAI.

2. The present writ petition has been preferred for the grant of following relief/s:-

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the order of the Patna High Court in CWJC No. 1788 of 2022, he preferred appeal (Rajbali Pandey vs. The District Magistrate, Bhagalpur and Ors.) before the Commissioner, Bhagalpur Division, Bhagalpur -cum- Arbitrator, though belatedly, which came to be dismissed on the ground of inordinate delay on 16.08.2023 and communicated vide memo no. 1081 dated 23.08.2023.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of this Court to a case decided in Santosh Kumar Pandey & Ors. vs The Union of India & Ors. (CWJC No. Patna High Court CWJC No.1799 of 2024(2) dt.14-05-2024 4/7 1363 of 2023) on 02.05.2024 where paragraph-6 onwards read as follows:-

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in that background, he shall be approaching the concerned competent Civil Court within four weeks for the redressal of the grievance but it is his further submission that the limitation may Patna High Court CWJC No.1799 of 2024(2) dt.14-05-2024 7/7 again come into picture.

6. In view of the earlier order passed on 02.05.2024 in Santosh Kumar Pandey (supra), this Court is of the opinion that the same benefit has to be extended to the petitioner herein.

7. If the petitioner approaches the concerned competent Court within a period of four weeks from today, the Court concerned shall take into account the fact that he was pursuing his remedy before the Writ Court while considering the limitation petition preferred by him. This Court clarifies that the same is restricted to only four weeks and not thereafter.

8. The writ petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid observation.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Adnan/-