IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13873 of 2009 Dr.Nirmal Kumar Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors ---------------------------------- 3. 19.08.2011 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 2.6.2009 declining to consider his case for promotion to the post of Professor. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been promoted as Assistant Professor with effect from 3.7.2008. He fulfils the eligibility requirements to be considered for the post of Professor. When the respondents did not consider him he came to this Court in CWJC No. 5663 of 2009. On 11.5.2009 the Court directed the respondents to consider his case for promotion to the post of Professor under the Career Advancements Scheme. Notwithstanding the filing of the writ petition nearly two years ago on 12.10.2009 the respondents have not considered it necessary to assist the Court in dispensation of justice by even having the courtesy of filing counter affidavit. Counsel for the State is unable to demonstrate to the Court from the recitals contained in the order dated 2.6.2009 of even a prima facie compliance with the order of the Court in CWJC No. 5663 of 2009. This Court had directed consideration of his case for promotion to the post of Professor. If the respondents found him fit for promotion to the post of Assistant Professor from 2.7.2008 they were simultaneously on 26.5.2009 required to consider his case for promotion to the post of Professor also and if not satisfied they were obliged to spell out reasons for the same in the order dated 2.6.2009. The impugned order dated 2.6.2009 is not in compliance with the orders of this Court in CWJC No. 5663 of 2009. A mandamus is therefore issued to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Professor in accordance with law within a maximum period of four months from the date of receipt and/or production of a copy of this order and dispose it off by a reasoned and speaking order. The Court reminds the respondents that the duty in them to give reasons is fundamental in nature in absence of which an order is per se rendered arbitrary and may have to be dealt with accordingly if need of judicial review arises. The writ application stands disposed. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)