Patna High Court
Asphak KhanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- WITHDRAWN
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The writ petition is permitted to be withdrawn as it is premature under the Bihar State Litigation Policy, 2011.
Summary
The petitioner, Asphak Khan, filed a civil writ petition in the Patna High Court against the State of Bihar and related officials, seeking relief. The petitioner’s counsel argued that the petition should be withdrawn as it was premature under Clause 4.C of the Bihar State Litigation Policy, 2011. The State counsel contended that the cause of action arose in 2017 and that the petitioner had delayed nine years before approaching the court. The court examined the policy provision, noting that a cause of action for such writs arises only after earlier writs for similarly situated persons are decided, and considered the long delay. Accordingly, the court permitted the writ petition to be withdrawn. The order was pronounced by Justice Dr. Anshuman.
Issues considered
- Whether the writ petition is premature under Clause 4.C of the Bihar State Litigation Policy, 2011
- Whether the nine‑year delay in filing bars the petition
Subjects
- writ petition
- withdrawal
- prematurity
- Bihar State Litigation Policy
- cause of action
- delay
- civil writ jurisdiction
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4649 of 2026
======================================================
Asphak Khan S/o Istiyak Khan, R/o Vill-Dumari, Post-Kiblaspur, Dumri,
Dist.-Kaimur (Bhabhua).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Director General of Police, Bihar.
2. The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Central Selection Board (Constable Recruitment) through its Chairman,
Sai Tara Complex, IAS Colony, Jawaharlal Nehru Marg, Patna.
4. The Chairman Central Selection Board (Constable Recruitment), Sai Tara
Complex, IAS Colony, Jawaharlal Nehru Marg, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sudhanshu Prakash, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Government Advocate (02)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
2 30-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State.
2. After some arguments, learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that the writ petition may be permitted to be
withdrawn, as it is premature in light of Clause 4.C of the Bihar
State Litigation Policy, 2011.
3. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand,
submits that the cause of action arose in the year 2017, and after
a lapse of nine years, the petitioner has approached this Court.
4. In response thereto, learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that there are a series of cases pending since
2017 onwards, but no final decision has been rendered.
Patna High Court CWJC No.4649 of 2026(2) dt.30-03-2026
2/2
5. In light of the submissions made above, particularly
considering Clause 4.C of the Bihar State Litigation Policy,
2011, the cause of action shall arise to the petitioner only after
allowing earlier writs in favour of similarly situated persons.
6. Accordingly, the present writ petition is hereby
permitted to be withdrawn.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.)
Aman Kumar/-
U
Checking your session…