Back
"": Patna HC Rejects Retired Worker's Regularisation Bid After 13-Year Delay
In a stern reminder that justice favors the prompt, the 's Division Bench—led by Chief Justice Sangam Kumar Sahoo and Justice Harish Kumar —dismissed Letters Patent Appeal No. 762 of 2025 on . The appeal, filed by Raj Kumar Jha against the and its officials, sought regularization of his services as a work charge employee and pensionary benefits. The court upheld a single judge's order, emphasizing and as fatal bars to relief.
From 1973 Appointment to 2025 Courtroom: A Timeline of Leaves, Appeals, and Rejections
Raj Kumar Jha joined as Work Supervisor Grade II in the Electrical-cum-Mechanical Division of the at Valmiki Nagar on . He claims continuous service until superannuation on , despite prolonged leaves sanctioned by the Executive Engineer—totaling 4,457 days (over 12 years)—due to illness. A 1987 government resolution banned fresh work charge hires and aimed to regularize those with five years' continuous service by .
Jha's regularization bids faltered repeatedly: - 2007 : Executive Engineer forwarded his case. - 2012 : High Court in C.W.J.C. No. 16099 directed consideration; contempt followed rejection via Memo No. 187 (). - 2014-2019 : Single judge dismissal in C.W.J.C. No. 130 overturned by Division Bench in L.P.A. No. 969 , remanding per Full Bench ruling in Mobina Khatoon v. (2019). - 2023 : Screening Committee rejected again via Memo No. 3953, citing illegal leave sanctions and lack of 10 years' continuous service. - 2025 : Fresh writ ( C.W.J.C. No. 9626 ) disposed with liberty for representation; Jha appealed without filing it.
The State countered with claims of unauthorized absences from , to (noted as 2024 in one record, likely a typo), arguing the Executive Engineer lacked authority under to sanction beyond four months for Class III/IV staff.
Petitioner's Plea: Discrimination and Due Process Denied
Jha argued his service book recorded leaves and regularization, with no termination or disciplinary action. He highlighted juniors' regularization, invoking Koshi Project Workers’ Association v. (2007) and Mobina Khatoon , claiming over 10 years' qualifying service entitled him to full pension. Continuous legal pursuit, he said, negated delay.
State's Firm Stand: Absence Breaks Continuity, Delay Seals Fate
Respondents urged dismissal on (prior challenges to Memo No. 187), 13-year post-retirement delay, and factual breaks in service. The Screening Committee deemed leaves illegal, recommended action against the Executive Engineer, and found no 10-year continuity per Finance Department Resolution No. 5547 (). As news reports noted, prolonged absences—framed as over 12 years—disentitled Jha entirely.
Courts Draw Line on : Precedents Seal the Deal
The Division Bench zeroed in on delay, citing
P.S. Sadasivaswamy v. State of Tamil Nadu
((1975) 1 SCC 152): Service disputes demand approach within six months to a year, or petitions merit limine dismissal to avoid court backlog. Representations don't extend limitation;
"
."
Distinguishing facts, the court noted prior remands led to reasoned rejections, yet Jha bypassed the single judge's 2025 liberty for fresh representation. No perversity warranted appellate interference—interference is "within a narrow compass."
Mobina Khatoon and Koshi were contextual but yielded to here, underscoring that unauthorized absences void continuity claims.
Key Observations from the Bench
"Law is well settled that mere representation does not extend the period of limitation and the aggrieved person has to approach the Court expeditiously and within a reasonable time. If it is found that the writ petitioner is guilty of delay and , the High Court would be fully justified to dismiss the writ petition at the threshold."
"A Court is not expected to give indulgence to the indolent persons who compete with Kumbhkarna and the delay does not deserve any indulgence and on that ground alone, the writ Court can throw the petition overboard at the very threshold."
"In view of the conduct of the appellant and the delayed approach and moreover, the stand taken by the State, regarding his unauthorized absence for more than 12 years at different times... it cannot be said that there is any perversity."
These pithy rebukes, echoed in contemporary coverage, paint a picture of judicial impatience with stale claims.
Final Verdict: Appeal Dismissed, No Interference
"Accordingly, the L.P.A stands dismissed."
The court found no "perversity, illegality or unreasonableness" in the single judge's order. Implications are clear: Post-retirement regularization suits face steep
hurdles, especially with service gaps. Work charge employees must act swiftly; prolonged absences risk permanent bar. This reinforces administrative finality in Bihar's regularization schemes, urging promptness in service litigation.
