IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4377 of 2003 BHARAT RAM NO.2 son of late Bandhu Maahto, resident of village Pakri P.S. Ara Nawada in the district of Bhojpur. Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.The Secretary, Public Works Department, Road, Bihar, Patna. 3.The Superintending Engineer, Bhojpur Road Circle, Public Works Department, Ara, Bhojpur. 4.The Executive Engineer, Shahabad Road Division, Public Works Department, Ara, Bhojpur. 5.The Accountant General (A & E) II, Bihar & Jharkhand, Patna. 6.The Senior Accounts Officer, Office of the Accountant General (A & E)-II, Bihar & Jharkhand, Patna. ----------- 4 31/7/2009 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. Strictly speaking this writ application by efflux of time has become infructuous. This writ application, claiming second time bound promotion and benefit thereof, was filed 2.5.2003, but the respondents by order as contained in memo no. 722 dated 29.7.2003 had given the petitioner the benefit of second time bound promotion with effect from 10.6.1994, i.e, the period on which the petitioner had completed 25 years of service as Road Roller. Normally that should have been end of the matter, but then Mr. Singh counsel for the petitioner has submitted that even though this order has been passed after three years of retirement of the petitioner but financial benefits has not been given till today. In absence of rejoinder to the counter affidavit this Court would not decide the same. If the petitioner has been given second time bound promotion with retrospective effect, benefit 2 thereof has to be paid in terms of government rules. That being so, the petitioner may represent to the authorities for grant of benefit of second time bound promotion if that has not been paid to him and the respondents will be also entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 7851/- as pointed out in the counter affidavit which is said to be excess amount paid to the petitioner. All these settlement of amount between the petitioner and the respondents must be completed, if not already made, within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. It goes without saying that after petitioner’s pay scale will be revised or may already have been revised in the light of the decision of the second time bound promotion, the retirement benefit of the petitioner will also be required to be revised. In that view of the matter, petitioner’s retirement benefit, if not recalculated and paid to him in the pay scale of second time bound promotion, the same must be done within the same period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. With the aforementioned observations/directions this application is finally disposed of. Abhay Kumar (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)