Navin Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

10 Mukesh Kumar, S/o Chandrika Prasad Sah, Resident of Village and PO – Pakriwarma, District – Nawada, presently posted as Assistant Teacher, Primary School, Kuthokari, PS – Warisaliganj, District - Nawada

¶16

... ... Respondent/s

¶17

======================================================

¶18

Appearance :

¶19

For the Petitioner/s : Mr Naresh Prasad, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr Hitesh Suman, AC to SC XIII

¶20

======================================================

¶21

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

6 01-12-2025

¶24

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶25

counsel for the respondents.

¶26

2 In the present writ application, the petitioner has

¶27

prayed for grant of following reliefs :

¶28

“(a) A certiorari for setting aside the order dated 24.05.2017 passed in Token No Appeal/74/2017 by the Chairperson, State Appellate Authority, Bihar, Patna whereby and whereunder he dismissed the appeal and upheld the order dated 03.03.2017 passed in Complaint Case No 4/17 by the District Appellate Authority,

¶29

Patna High Court CWJC No.12232 of 2017(6) dt.01-12-2025 2/3

¶30

Nawada.

¶31

(b) A certiorari setting aside the order dated 03.03.2017 passed in Complaint Case No 4/17 filed before the District Appellate Authority, Nawada whereby and whereunder the complaints of the petitioner had been rejected on the ground of limitation only and not merit.

¶32

(c) A Mandamus commanding the respondent authority concerned to appoint the petitioner on the post of Panchayat Teacher of Dosut Gram Panchayat under Warisaliganj Block in the district of Nawada in place of respondent No 10 Mukesh Kumar in OBC category.

¶33

(d) Any other writ/writs for granting any relief/reliefs for which the petitioner is found entitled to in the facts and circumstances of the present case.”

¶34

3 From the relief claimed by the petitioner, it is apparent that the petitioner is challenging the appointment made in the year, 2006. As against the same, this writ application has been filed after 11 years. When specific query was made to learned counsel for the petitioner that as to why the petitioner has approached this Court so belatedly, learned counsel for the petitioner could not explain the delay to the satisfaction of this Court. A sleeping litigant has no remedy in law and particularly when the delay in filing the writ application has not been explained.

¶35

4 In such view of the matter, the present writ

¶36

Patna High Court CWJC No.12232 of 2017(6) dt.01-12-2025 3/3

¶37

application is dismissed on account of delay and laches.

¶38

(Alok Kumar Sinha, J)

¶39

M.E.H. /-

¶40

U