IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.17411 of 2009 1. BHOLESHWAR PRASAD YADAV S/O MANIK YADAV R/O WARD NO.-9, MADHEPURA MUNCIPALITY, P.S. & DISTT.- MADHEPURA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE COMMISSIONER KOSI DIVISION, SAHARSA 3. THE COLLECTOR MADHEPURA ----------- 2. 17.2.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The objection of delay on part of the State stands adequately explained from the facts that the petitioner has been pursuing the matter since 1990-91 before the District Magistrate followed by an appeal before the Commissioner but remanded to the District Magistrate in 1992, whereafter no orders were passed. The petitioner then pursued the matter again before the Lokayukt when initially his claims were allowed but by a non speaking order has subsequently been declined. The petitioner was holding the post of Assistant. He was asked to discharge duties of an Office Superintendent from 1.1.1990 and from which post he retired on 31.7.1990. He desires the salary of an Office Superintendent and consequent revision of his pensionary benefits accordingly. The only issue for determination is if on 1.1.1990 the petitioner fulfilled the conditions of eligibility for being 2 considered for promotion to the post of Office Superintendent. If he did, it shall be deemed that he was promoted on 1.1.1990 and retired from that post when he shall be entitled to full salary and revision of his pensionary benefits accordingly. If the petitioner is held not eligible for promotion to the post of Office Superintendent on 1.1.1990, if he held dual charge of that post along with his substantive rank of Assistant, he is nonetheless entitled to the additional allowance under Article 103 of the Bihar Service Code for duties discharged as an Office Superintendent. Let the petitioner file a detailed representation raising all grounds available to him in accordance with the aforesaid discussion. The District Magistrate, Madhepura is then required to dispose off his representation by a reasoned and speaking order displaying full application of mind to the grounds urged on behalf of the petitioner so that judicial review of the order may be facilitated, if need arises. Let the same be done within a maximum period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The writ application stands disposed. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)