Dismissed¶¶35

Sushil Kumar Gupta v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC2 Apr 2026CWJC/4893/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delay and laches; limitation; representation does not extend limitation; reasonable time to approach the Court; ACP; MACP; Pay Band-3 Grade Pay 5400; Stenographer; Patna Judgeship / District Civil Court, Patna; parity with Clerk Grade-I; writ filed long after retirement; Surjeet Singh Sahni vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors., (2022) 15 SCC 536; Partha Sarthy, J; Patna High Court CWJC No. 4893 of 2026; decided 02-04-2026; petition dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The reliefs sought were moved 14 years after the cause of action arose and almost more than a decade after the petitioner retired from service; the writ application is fit to be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches, representations not extending limitation. ¶¶34

Sushil Kumar Gupta Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4893 of 2026

¶2

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

¶3

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).

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through The Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

¶7

The Additional Chief Secretary, Law Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

¶8

The Additional Chief Secretary, Finance Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

¶9

The Principle District and Sessions Judge, Patna.

¶10

Registrar -cum- Judge in Charge, Accounts Civil Court, Patna, Patna.

¶11

The District Accounts Officer, Patna.

¶12

The Accountant General (A and E), Bihar, Patna.

¶13

... ... Respondent/s

¶14

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

¶15

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER

¶16

2 02-04-2026

¶17

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶18

counsel for the respondent nos.4 and 5.

¶19

The petitioner has filed the instant application for

¶20

the following reliefs :-

¶21

“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.

¶22

ii) Further for issuance of a direction to the concerned Respondents to calculate and pay the entire dues amount from the date which

¶23

Patna High Court CWJC No.4893 of 2026(2) dt.02-04-2026 2/3

¶24

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

¶25

iii) For grant to any other relief or reliefs for which the petitioner is entitled to.”

¶26

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.

¶27

By order dated 13.6.2007, he got the 1^st ACP with effect from 9.8.1989 as also the 2^nd MACP with effect from 1.8.2004. He further got the 3^rd MACP by order dated 2.3.2012 with effect from 1.4.2010.

¶28

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.

¶29

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.

¶30

In response, it is submitted by learned counsel for

¶31

Patna High Court CWJC No.4893 of 2026(2) dt.02-04-2026 3/3

¶32

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 (AnnexureP/1A).

¶33

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.

¶34

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.

¶35

The application is dismissed.

¶36

(Partha Sarthy, J)

¶37

avinash/-

¶38

Sushil Kumar Gupta v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sushil Kumar Gupta v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raju Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Vikki Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Afsar Manjhi Vs The State of Bihar

Mithlesh Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Ehteshamuddin Vs The State of Bihar

Baiju Kumar Bharti Vs The State of Bihar