IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10832 of 2010 1. Bindhyachal Singh S/O Late Surjan Singh R/O Vill.- Karath, P.S.- Tarari, Distt.- Bhojpur Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Director General-Cum-Inspector General Of Police, Bihar, Patna 3. The Board Of Inspector General Constituted For Promotion For The Post Of Dy. S.P. Represented Through The Director General Of Police, Bihar, Patna 4. The Additional Inspector General Of Police (Hq), Patna Region, Patna 5. The Inspector General Of Police (Hq & Admn.) Patna Region, Patna ----------- 3. 11.11.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner an Inspector of Police is aggrieved by denial of consideration for promotion to the post of Dy. S.P. with effect from December, 2008 when his juniors have been granted promotion. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his case was considered by the Departmental Promotion Committee in May and July, 2008. The only observation made therein was that his service career was not satisfactory. Learned counsel submits that it may not be sufficient to withhold consideration for promotion unless there are any orders of punishment or the service Rules denying right for such consideration based on the nature of the adverse entries if permissible. The counter affidavit filed by the 2 respondents through the Dy. S.D.C.I.D., Vigilance (Electricity Cell) is hardly helpful. It suggests a departmental proceeding against the petitioner. It does not state with clarity if the proceedings are pending or have attained finality or have been closed. Counsel for the State insists that the counter affidavit is clear. The Court has gone through the counter affidavit again. It is of the confirmed opinion that the counter affidavit leaves much to be desired to fully understand and appreciate the stand of the respondents for final adjudication. The Court would have expected the deponent of the affidavit to ensure that he put forth the stand of the State with more preciseness, clarity and certainty in the counter affidavit. Learned counsel for the State suggests that since the Director General of Police possesses power of revision over the decisions of the Departmental Promotion Committee, the matter may be referred to him for appropriate decision. It is accordingly ordered. The Court expects the Director General of Police to take appropriate final decision in the matter by reasoned and 3 speaking order in accordance with law preferably within a maximum period of four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The writ application stands disposed. P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)