IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.541 of 2011 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2. THE COMMISSIONER-CUM-SECRETARY, REVENUE AND LAND REFORMS, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. COMMISSIONER, DARBHANGA DIVISION, DARBHANGA. 4. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SAMASTIPUR. ………………………………………………………………… RESPONDENT 1 TO 4 IN WRIT APPLICATION/ APPELANTS. Versus PARMESHWAR PRASAD MAHTO, SON OF LATE BHIKAR MAHTO, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-KARIAN TOLA BHARARIA, P.S. ROSERA, DISTRICT- SAMASTIPUR. ………………………………………………………………… PETITIONER IN THE WRIT APPLICATION/ RESPONDENT. ----------- For the Appellant : Mrs. Nilu Agrawal, G.A.-VI, M/s. Manoj Kumar and Zaki Haider, AC to GA-VI. Respondent : M/s. Prabhat Kumar Singh and Amitabh Bhardwaj, Advocates. ----------- 2 29.03.2011 I.A. No. 2389 of 2011 This application has been filed for condoning the delay of about 1 year 63 days in preferring this appeal. Heard the parties. On being satisfied with the statements made in this 2 application explaining reasons due to which the delay has occurred in preferring this appeal, this interlocutory application is allowed and the delay is hereby condoned. L.P.A. No. 541 of 2011 Learned Counsel for the State has contended that the respondent on earlier occasion has approached this Court in 2005 itself claiming promotion by filing C.W.J.C. No. 9787 of 2005, which has been disposed of by this Court vide order dated 28.11.2006, directing the Commissioner, Darbhanga Division to consider the case of the petitioner of that writ application for promotion to the post of Circle Inspector- cum -Kanungo from the post of Amin but the said order was not implemented. The Commissioner, Darbhanga Division has passed the impugned order, i.e., Annexure-‘1’ declining the promotion as the new Rules came into force. The same question was decided in C.W.J.C. 625/2008, which has been disposed of by the learned Single Judge on 4.12.2009. The case of the respondent before the learned Single Judge was that one Kamalesh Mishra, who was at Sl. No. 1, has approached this Court in 1998 by filing C.W.J.C. No.11263 of 1998 and orders upon which were passed on 11.11. 2004. It is further contended that the 3 said Kamalesh Mishra was given promotion and the respondent, who was at Sl. No. 2 in the seniority list was not promoted and he has given number of representations to the authorities concerned but the same has gone in vain. When the concerned authorities have not given any heed to the representations filed by the respondent herein for his promotion, then the respondent has preferred C.W.J.C. 9787 of 2005, which has been disposed of by an order of this Court remanding the matter to the Commissioner, Darbhanga Division to consider his case in accordance with law. Accordingly the impugned order which has been passed by the concerned authority stating that now the new Rules have come into force and the respondent has claimed his promotion as a matter of right. However, the same was subjected to C.W.J.C. No.625 of 2008, which was allowed by the learned Single Judge directing the respondents to consider and pass appropriate orders with regard to the promotion of the petitioner (respondent herein) in the light of the judgment of this Court passed in C.W.J.C. No. 11263 of 1998 filed by aforesaid Kamlesh Mishra and as affirmed in L.P.A. No. 963 of 2005. Learned counsel has contended that the aforesaid Kamlesh Mishra has been given promotion 4 prior to the new Rules coming into force. In a peculiar facts and circumstances and considering that since the respondent has already approached this Court in 2005 by filing C.W.J.C. 9787 of 2005, which has been disposed of directing the Commissioner, Darbhanga Division to consider the case of the respondent in view of the orders passed by the Court in the case of Kamalesh Mishra in C.W.J.C. No.11263 of 1998 ,we are of the opinion that the concerned authorities are bound to comply the order passed by this Court in C.W.J.C. No.9787 of 2005. In view of the above discussions, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, the L.P.A. is dismissed. Spd/- P.S. (T. Meena Kumari, J.) ( Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)