Patna High Court
Prabhu Prasad NagversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- PARTHA SARTHY
Holding
The petition is dismissed on the ground of delay and laches.
Summary
The petitioner, Prabhu Prasad Nag, was appointed as Dalpati in 1995 and sought promotion to Panchayat Secretary with seniority and back salary, alleging that junior colleagues were promoted earlier. He previously obtained a court order in 1999 directing the District Magistrate to consider his case, which resulted in his promotion in October 2003. In 2026, he filed a writ petition seeking direction for seniority from 1995, payment of salary at the Panchayat Secretary scale, and any other reliefs. The respondents contended that the petition was barred by delay and laches, as no explanation was given for the 23‑year gap since the 2003 promotion. The Court, relying on the Supreme Court’s observation in Surjeet Singh Sahni v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2022) 15 SCC 536 that representation does not extend limitation, held that the petition was filed unreasonably late. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ application on the ground of delay and laches. The dismissal leaves the petitioner without the claimed seniority or back salary.
Issues considered
- Whether the writ petition is barred by limitation, delay, or laches.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to seniority and back salary from 1995 despite the late filing.
Subjects
- seniority
- promotion
- service law
- limitation
- laches
- writ petition
- administrative law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3423 of 2026
======================================================
Prabhu Prasad Nag S/O Indrasan Prasad Nag, Resident of Village- Jura Pakri,
P.S.- Ramnagar, District- West Champaran (Bettiah).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through its Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj
Department, Govt. of Bihar.
2. The Accountant General, Govt. of Bihar.
3. The Senior Account Officer, Officer of Accountant General, Patna, Bihar.
4. The District Magistrate, West Champaran (Bettiah).
5. The District Treasury Officer, West Champaran (Bettiah).
6. The District Panchayat Raj Officer, West Champaran (Bettiah).
7. The Block Development Officer Ramnagar, West Champaran (Bettiah).
8. The Block Development Officer, Chanpatiya, West Champaran.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kaushal Kishor, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. K.P.Gupta, GP 10
Mrs. Nivedita Nirvikar, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Satya Vrat, AC to GP 10
Mr. Pravin Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL ORDER
2 13-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned counsel for the respondents.
2. The petitioner has filed the instant application
for the following reliefs:
“I. For direction to respondent authority for
Treatment of Seniority to be given to the
petitioner from 1995 as to junior to petitioner
who were working as a dalpati made as
Panchayat Secretary rather petitioner were
given said benefit only in 2003.
Patna High Court CWJC No.3423 of 2026(2) dt.13-03-2026
2/3
II. For direction to respondent authority to make
payment of salary between 1995 to 2003 in the
scale of Panchayat Secretary rather than Dal
Pati.
III. For direction to respondent for any other
reliefs for which petitioner may found entitled, fit
and proper for want of justice.”
3. It is the case of the petitioner that having been
appointed as Dalpati, he started working in the said capacity.
Not having been promoted to the post of Panchayat Secretary
inspite of the policy decision of the State Government, the
petitioner moved this Court vide CWJC no.1641 of 1998 which
was disposed of by order dated 8.9.1999 (Annexure-P/1)
directing the District Magistrate to consider the case of the
petitioner expeditiously.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner
that pursuant to the directions passed by this Court, the case of
the petitioner was considered by the District Selection
Committee which led to the petitioner being made Panchayat
Sachiv in October, 2003.
5. The grievance of the petitioner is that persons
junior to the petitioner as Dalpati having been made Panchayat
Sachiv earlier to this petitioner, as such he moved this Court by
way of writ application for the reliefs as stated hereinabove.
Patna High Court CWJC No.3423 of 2026(2) dt.13-03-2026
3/3
6. At the outset, learned counsel for the respondents
submits that the writ application is fit to be dismissed on the
ground of delay and laches itself, there being no explanation for
not having moved this Court earlier in the year 2003.
7. This Court finds substance in the submissions made
by learned counsel for the respondents.
8. It may be observed that the Hon’ble Supreme Court
in the case of Surjeet Singh Sahni versus State of Uttar
Pradesh & Ors.; (2022) 15 SCC 536 has observed that filing of
representation does not extend the limitation and the person
aggrieved has to approach this Court within a reasonable time.
9. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
having perused contents of the petition, the Court is satisfied
that the case is fit to be dismissed on ground of delay and
laches.
10. The writ application and the same is dismissed.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
Bibhash
U
Checking your session…