IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10050 of 2005 SRI KRISHNA RAI, son of Late Balmukund Rai, resident of Mission Road, Pakari, Ara, P. S. Nawada, District- Bhojpur at Ara, retired Junior Engineer, N. H. Division, Khagaria, District- Khagaria….. Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Secretary, Road Construction Department, Bishweshwaraiya Bhawan, Bailley Road, Patna. 3. The Engineer-in-Chief-cum- Additional Secretary, Road Construction Department, Bishweshwaraiya Bhawan, Bailley Road, Patna. 4. The Joint Secretary, Road Construction Department, Bishweshwaraiya Bhawan, Bailley Road, Patna. 5. The Deputy Secretary, Road Construction Department, Bishweshwaraiya Bhawan, Bailley Road, Patna. …. Respondents ----------- 2. 04.01.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioner. No one appears for the State. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows:- (i) For issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of Mandamus, commanding and directing the respondent authorities for grant of promotion of the petitioner to the post of Assistant Engineer with effect from due date i.e. 01.04.1994 as decided by the respondent authorities and communicated under Memo No. 10542 dated 03.12.1999 which was decided by the respondents in view of the direction of this Hon’ble Court passed in C.w.J.C. No. 3117 of 1997. (ii) For issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of Mandamus, commanding and directing the respondent authorities for payment of all consequential monetary benefits to the petitioner in the pay-scale of Assistant Engineer, with effect from the due dated of his promotion i.e. 2 01.04.1994 with a further direction to revise the post of retirement benefits of the petitioner on the basis of revised pay-scale in the scale of Assistant Engineer.” Counsel for the petitioner however has filed a supplementary affidavit wherein it has been stated that on 19.11.2009 the petitioner has been given promotion on the post of Assistant Engineer w.e.f. 1.4.1994 but the same is only on notional basis and thus would deprive the petitioner from any financial benefit. In absence of counter affidavit and also counsel for the State, this Court would not find any reason for the aforementioned order of the Government giving promotion to the petitioner on notional basis. It is well settled that if a person was ignored for none of his fault in getting promotion and ultimately is given promotion from the date his juniors were so given, he is also entitled to same financial benefit which his juniors were given. There is no averment in the writ petition as with regard to financial benefit given to other juniors to the petitioner and in fact supplementary affidavit filed today 3 also does not improve his position. That being so, this Court would give liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent authority including respondent no. 2 who now would re-examine the matter and if it is found that any junior to the petitioner was given promotion w.e.f. 1.4.1994 with full financial benefit and there was no laches on the part of the petitioner in getting promotion on the date his juniors were given such promotion, the petitioner will also be given the financial benefit which was extended to his juniors. In order to expedite the matter, the petitioner may file a compact representation enclosing the evidence and the same would be disposed of by a speaking order within a period of six months from the date its being filed along with a copy of this order. With the aforementioned observations and directions, this writ application is disposed of. kanchan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)