Patna High Court
Dinesh Prasad YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- RITESH KUMAR
Holding
The writ petition is dismissed for lack of merit.
Summary
The petitioner, a former Home Guard who retired on 2 January 2024, filed a writ petition seeking an order directing the Commandant of the Bihar Home Guard to extend his service for an additional five years and to correct his date of birth in service records. He claimed that his request for extension and a change of birth date from 1964 to 1969 had been ignored, leaving him without livelihood. The State argued that the petitioner's post‑retirement request to alter his date of birth was impermissible and unsupported by documents. The Court observed that the petitioner never raised any grievance about his date of birth before retirement and had waited nearly two years before filing the petition, indicating a lack of bona fides. Consequently, the Court found no merit in the writ petition and dismissed it.
Issues considered
- Whether a retired Home Guard can be ordered to extend his service for five years under the Bihar Home Guard Service Amendment Rule, 2010.
- Whether a post‑retirement representation to change the date of birth in service records is permissible.
- Whether the writ petition is maintainable given the delay and absence of prior grievance.
Subjects
- Home Guard
- extension of service
- date of birth correction
- writ petition
- retirement
- administrative law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No 2762 of 2026
======================================================
Dinesh Prasad Yadav S/o Late Shivlal Yadav, Resident of Village- Kakoda,
Ward No. 06, P.O.- Jokihat, Bagnagar, P.S.- Mahalgaon, District- Araria
(Bihar).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Home Department,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Director General-cum-Commandant General, Home Guard, Bihar,
Patna.
3. The Director General, Bihar Home Guards Department, Bihar, Patna.
4. The Commandant, Bihar Home Guard, Araria.
5. The Superintendent of Police, Araria, Bihar.
6. The SHO-cum-Officer-in-Charge, Alamganj, Patna, Bihar.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr Shambhu Sharan Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr Anant Prasad Singh, SC XV with
Ms Deepika Sharma, AC to SC XV
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE RITESH KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 18-02-2026
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2 The petitioner has filed the present writ petition for the
following reliefs:
(i) For direction/order to the
respondent authority concern respondent No 4
(the Commandant, Bihar Home Guard, Araria)
to command the respondent No 5 (SP, Araria)
and respondent No 6 (SHO, Alamganj, Patna)
where from the petitioner was retired on 02 Jan
2024 and the matter of petitioner was considered
for further five years as extended service as per
rule of Bihar Home Guard Service Amendment
Rule, 2010 and the petitioner after consideration
allowed with Camman for deputation at
Bhagalpur where the petitioner done his duty as
per Camman and also get salary for his work
done.
Patna High Court CWJC No.2762 of 2026 dt.18-02-2026
2/3
(ii) For direction/order further to the
respondents concern to consider the matter of
rest extended duty of four years since (near
about one year duty of extend service as done by
the petitioner) for which due to otherwise
reasons neither handover the Camman to the
petitioner nor refused for the Camman in
writing to the petitioner and the authority
concern kept the petitioner in pendulum
condition and precious time of extended period
of service after retirement are being spoiled by
them and without Camman it is impossible for
the petitioner to do anything for the department
work at anywhere and in such manner the
petitioner is deprived from his livelihood and
such act of the authority concern in nothing but
a financial punishment for the petitioner in his
old age.
(iii) For other consequential
relief/reliefs to the petitioner for which he is
entitled to get in future four years extended
service.
(iv) For other relief/reliefs as your
lordships may deem fit and proper in the interest
of justice in the matter.”
3 The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner gave his joining as a Home Guard on 05.11.1988 and,
after serving in the different places, retired from service on
02.01.2024. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits
that the petitioner undergone training of 28 days and was sent to
Bhagalpur for some period, but the authorities concerned are not
paying heed to his request to extend his service for a further period
of five years. The learned counsel for the petitioner further
Patna High Court CWJC No.2762 of 2026 dt.18-02-2026
3/3
submits that the petitioner has filed a representation contained in
Annexures P-4 and P-4/1 to the writ petition. From perusal of
Annexures P-4 and P-4/1, it would transpire that the petitioner has
submitted a representation before the Commandant, Home Guard,
Araria wth a request to change his date of birth from 02.01.1964 to
02.01.1969 and to extend his service for five years.
4 The learned counsel for the State submits that after
retirement of the petitioner, he has filed the representation for
correction in the date of birth which is not permissible and that too
without any document.
5 Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, I find
no merit in the present writ petition, since admittedly the petitioner
retired on 02.01.2024 and till his retirement, he never raised any
grievance with regard to his date of birth, to be incorrect and now
after almost two years after his retirement he woke up from
slumber and has filed the present case.
6 Accordingly, I find no merit in the present writ petition
and the same is dismissed.
(Ritesh Kumar, J)
M.E.H./-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 25.02.2026
Transmission Date NA
Checking your session…