Patna High Court
Sushil Kumar GuptaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- PARTHA SARTHY
Holding
The writ petition is dismissed as it is barred by delay and laches.
Summary
The petitioner, a former stenographer of the Patna District Civil Court, filed a writ petition seeking payment of Pay Band‑3 Grade Pay Rs.5,400, claiming entitlement from 13 April 2012. He retired in July 2016 and alleged that successive orders had granted him higher pay scales, but the payments were not made. The respondents objected on the ground of inordinate delay, noting that the petition was filed more than 12 years after the claimed entitlement and 14 years after the cause of action arose. The petitioner argued that his representations to the authorities in 2012 and 2025 should extend the limitation period. The Court, relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Surjeet Singh Sahni v. State of Uttar Pradesh, held that representation does not extend limitation and that the petition is barred by delay and laches. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ application.
Issues considered
- Whether the writ petition is barred by limitation and laches due to the delay in filing.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to Pay Band‑3 Grade Pay Rs.5,400 as a stenographer.
- Whether representations made to the authorities extend the limitation period for filing a writ.
Subjects
- limitation
- laches
- civil service pay
- writ petition
- pay band
- grade pay
- delay
- representation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4893 of 2026
======================================================
Sushil Kumar Gupta, Son of Sri Chandra Bhan Prasad, Resident of Flat No.-
305 B, Shivam Enclave, Mohalla- West Boring Canal Road, Behind New
Aditya Vision, P.S.-Sri Krishna Puri, District-Patna (Bihar).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through The Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Additional Chief Secretary, Law Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Additional Chief Secretary, Finance Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
4. The Principle District and Sessions Judge, Patna.
5. Registrar -cum- Judge in Charge, Accounts Civil Court, Patna, Patna.
6. The District Accounts Officer, Patna.
7. The Accountant General (A and E), Bihar, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Ms. Asha Verma, Advocate
Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Additional Advocate General-4
For the Acct. General : Mr. Binod Kumar Labh, Advocate
For the Resp. Nos. 4&5 : Mr. Piyush Lall, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL ORDER
2 02-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the respondent nos.4 and 5.
2. The petitioner has filed the instant application for
the following reliefs :-
“i) To grant and making appropriate
payment by Pay-Band-3 Grade Pay Rs. 5,400/-
to the ‘Stenographer’ under the Judgeship of
District Civil Court, Patna for which petitioner
is legally entitled in accordance with law.
ii) Further for issuance of a direction
to the concerned Respondents to calculate and
pay the entire dues amount from the date which
Patna High Court CWJC No.4893 of 2026(2) dt.02-04-2026
2/3
is legally payable to the petitioner as
“Stenographer” of Patna Judgeship entitled in
comparison with the payments, which has been
made to the persons working in the capacity of
Clerk of Grader-I having Pay Band-3 Grade Pay
5400/- under the District Judge, Civil Court,
Patna
iii) For grant to any other relief or
reliefs for which the petitioner is entitled to.”
3. The case of the petitioner in brief is that he was
appointed on the post of Stenographer on 1.4.1980 and retired
from service on 31.7.2016.
4. By order dated 13.6.2007, he got the 1st ACP with
effect from 9.8.1989 as also the 2nd MACP with effect from
1.8.2004. He further got the 3rd MACP by order dated 2.3.2012
with effect from 1.4.2010.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner should be given payment in Pay Band-3, Grade Pay
5400/- to which he is legally entitled with effect from 13.4.2012.
6. At the outset, learned counsel appearing for the
respondents raises an objection with respect to delay in filing of
the writ application which has been filed more than 12 years
from the date the petitioner claims his entitlement, on
31.3.2026.
7. In response, it is submitted by learned counsel for
Patna High Court CWJC No.4893 of 2026(2) dt.02-04-2026
3/3
the petitioner that the petitioner has regularly been representing
before the respondent authorities and in evidence thereof,
attention of the Court is brought to the represention dated
13.4.2012 (Annexure-P/1) as also dated 19.12.2025 (Annexure-
P/1A).
8. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Surjeet
Singh Sahni vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.; (2022) 15
SCC 536 has held that representation does not extend the
limitation and the person affected has to approach the Court
within a reasonable time.
9. In view of the facts and circumstances stated herein
above, the Court finds substance in the objection raised by the
respondents. The reliefs sought for in the writ application
having been moved 14 years after the cause of action arose and
almost more than a decade after the petitioner retired from
service, the application is fit to be dismissed on the ground of
delay and laches.
10. The application is dismissed.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
avinash/-
U
Checking your session…