IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4267 of 2008 1. SANJAY KUMAR ROY, SON OF SRI BIRENDRA KUMAR ROY, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BADLACHAK, P.O. DHANKUNIA, P.S. BELHAR, DISTRICT BANKA, PRESENTLY POSTED AS SUB-INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, NAWADAH. 2. ANIL KUMAR AZAD, SON OF SRI RATEN DEV SHARMA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SUMERA, P.O. MALATHI, P.S. MAKHDUMPUR, DISTRICT JEHANABAD, PRESENTLY POSTED AS SUB-INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, PURNEA. 3. KRISHNA MURARI, SON OF SRI SHYAM NANDAN OJHA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE CHAUMUKH, P.S. BOCHAHAN, DISTRICT MUZAFFARPUR, PRESENTLY POSTED AS SUB-INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, MOTIHARI. 4. SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, SON OF SRI SACHIDANAND SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE + P.O. MANUPUR, P.S. DIGHWARA, DISTRICT CHAPRA(SARAN), PRESENTLY POSTED AS SUB-INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, KATIHAR. 5. SHAMBHU SHARAN SINHA, SON OF LATE AWADH KISHORE PRASAD SINHA, RESIDENT OF KANHOULIDIH, RAMBAGH ROAD, NEAR SANSKRIT COLLEGE, TOWN+DISTRICT MUZAFFARPUR, PRESENTLY POSTED AS SUB-INSEPCTOR OF EXCISE, ROHTAS. ____________________________________________________________ PETITIONERS Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. THE MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE, BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER-CUM-SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REGISTRATION, EXCISE AND PROHIBITION, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 4. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER, EXCISE, BIHAR, PATNA. 5. THE SECRETARY TO EXCISE COMMISSIONER, BIHAR, PATNA. 6. THE UNDER SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF EXCISE AND PROHIBITION, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 7. SRI KAMLESHWARI PRASAD SINHA, INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, C/O OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF EXCISE, COLLECTORATE, SITAMARHI. 8. SRI BASHISHTHA PRASAD, INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, C/O OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF EXCISE, COLLECTORATE, MUZAFFARPUR. 9. SRI SUKHDEO RAM, INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, C/O OFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF EXCISE, COLLECTORATE, BEGUSARAI. 10. SRI KRISHNA CHOUDHARY, INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, C/O OFFICE OF ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, COLLECTORATE, ROHTAS AT SASARAM. 11. SRI JAGDISH RAM, INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, C/O OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF EXISE, COLLECTORATE, VAISHALI AT HAJIPUR. 12. SRI VISHWANATH PRASAD, INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, JAMUI, C/O OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF EXCISE, COLLECTORATE, MUNG ER. 13. SRI RAJENDRA SAHU, INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, MUNGER, C/O OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF EXCISE, COLLECTORATE, MUNGER. 14. THE DEPUTY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 15. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, EXCISE (DISTILLERY & WAREHOUSE), BIHAR, PATNA. __________________________________________________________ RESPONDENTS ******* 2 2 18.4.2011 The writ petitioners have made two fold prayer in this writ application. Firstly, they have prayed that the state respondents may grant promotion to the petitioners to the post o Inspector of Excise. This part of the prayer of the petitioners has been redressed inasmuch as the petitioners have been granted the said promotion vide Annexure-A, Annexure-A/1 and Annexure-15 of this application. The second prayer made by the petitioners is for quashing the order contained in Memo No. 414 dated 1.2.2008, issued by the Excise Commissioner-cum- Secretary, Department of Registration, Excise and Prohibition, Government of by which respondent nos. 7 to 13 of this writ application have been granted promotion vide Annexur-10. In the said transaction 32 persons were granted promotion to the post of Excise Inspector. The petitioners claim that respondent nos. 7 to 13 did not undergo P.T.C. training which is essential in accordance with the rules. It is also stated that two of the respondents were 3 facing department proceeding which was subsequently set aside by the Minister of the Department. It is the claim of the petitioners that such persons were not given the said promotion, the petitioners would be entitled to be considered for promotion instead of the respondent nos. 7 to 13. In view of the fact that the petitioners have been granted the relief that they have prayed for, I do not think that this is an appropriate case in which this Court should enter into an enquiry regarding the validity of the promotion granted to the respondents. If the petitioners have any such grievance, they may raise this matter before the appropriate authority. Lastly, it is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the promotion of the petitioners should be in accordance with the Government’s decision contained in letter no. 104 dated 9.1.1992 which envisages that the State Government should make promotions in accordance with the date on which the vacancies existed or occurred. For this purpose, the petitioners may bring the order of this Court to the notice of the Member, Board of Revenue, 4 Bihar, Patna who will consider the submissions made on behalf of the petitioners in accordance with law. This writ application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations. Sanjay ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)