IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5223 of 2010 1. JAWAHAR LAL S/O LATE CHATURBHUJ LAL DAS R/O VILL.- MORWARA-1, P.S.- SINGIYA, DISTT.- SAMASTIPUR, PRESENTLY POSTED AS ASSISTANT, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, VISHWESHWARIYA, BHAWAN, PATNA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY PERSONAL & ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE JOINT SECRETARY, PERSONAL & ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE DEPUTY SECRETARY, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 5. THE DEPUTY SECRETARY, PERSONAL & ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA ----------- 02. 18.11.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Counter affidavit is stated to have been filed on 30.6.2010 on behalf of the respondents. The same is not available on the record. The Court, therefore, requested the learned counsel for the respondents to make available his copy so as not to hold up the proceedings on that ground. The office is directed to place the same on record. The petitioner who is an Assistant, in the Department of Road Construction, seeks to be considered for promotion to the post of Section Officer. The grievance is that while his juniors have been so considered and promoted on 17.7.2009, he has been denied the benefit. 2 Learned counsel submits that the Departmental Promotion Committee failed to take a decision with regard to him on 11.8.2009 as the annual confidential reports for the years 2004-05 till 2008-09 was not placed before it which was the responsibility of the respondents themselves. Learned counsel for the State from the counter affidavit submits that the case of the petitioner was considered again on 24.2.2010, when it transpired that by an office order no. 155 dated 17.9.2009 the petitioner was punished by withholding of one annual increment with non- cumulative effect. Thus, this debars him from consideration till the due date under Rule 14, Sub- rule-2 (IV) of the C.C.A. Rules, 2005. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is not aware of any order of punishment dated 17.9.2009. Conversely the Court finds that there is no specific assertion in the writ application that there were no proceedings pending against him and he stood on a clean state. Be that as it may, it is unfortunate that the State has chosen to confront the Court with its own conclusions rather than placing full materials before the Court along with documents in support of the 3 statement in the counter affidavit. Learned counsel for the State fairly submits that the effect of the punishment also is over and the petitioner can be considered. That shall not defeat his claim for consideration from the date that his juniors have been promoted unless the punishment dated 17.9.2009 was in consonance with the law. Let the petitioner file a representation before the respondents. If he asserts that there were no proceedings against him and he is not aware of any orders of punishment, the respondents shall be obliged to furnish him full particulars with regard to the proceedings, of the final order passed, to enable him to meet the same. In this manner, let his claim for promotion from the due date be considered in accordance with law and final orders passed within a maximum period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The application stands disposed. P.K. (Navin Sinha, J.)