IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2361 of 2010 1. Bankey Paswan S/O Late Dhanik Paswan R/O Vill.- Nawlagarh, P.S.- Bhagwanpur, Distt.- Begusarai, Sub- Inspector Of Police, Vigilance Investigation Bureau, At Present Deputed To Office Of Lokayukt, Patna Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Commissioner-Cum-Secretary Department Of Home, Government Of Bihar, Patna 3. The Director General And Inspector General Of Police Bihar, Patna 4. The Commissioner Department Of Cabinet (Vigilance), Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 5. Additional Director General And Inspector General Of Police Vigilance Investigation Bureau, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 6. The Superintendent Of Police Vigilance Investigation Bureau, Bihar, Patna 7. Sri Jaswant Sahay Ambastha, Inspector Of Police (Retd.) S/O Not Known To Petitioner T.P.S. College Road, P.S. Kankarbagh, Patna 8. Sri Lal Bahadur Singh S/O Not Known To Petitioner Inspector Of Police (Retd.), Saristabad, P.S. Gardanibagh, Patna 9. Sri Upendra Prasad Singh S/O Not Known To Petitioner Inspector Of Police, Vigilance Investigation Bureau, Combined Building, Bhagalpur 10. Sri Anugrah Narayan Singh S/O Not Known To Petitioner Inspector Of Police, Vigilance Investigation Bureau, Muzaffarpur 11. Sri Deo Pujan Ram S/O Not Known To Petitioner Inspector Of Police, Vigilance Investigation Bureau, Department Of Cabinet, 6, Circular Road, Patna 12. Sri Vijay Kumar Singh S/O Not Known To Petitioner Inspector Of Police, Vigilance Investigation Bureau, Saharsa 13. Sri Nawal Kishore Prasad S/O Not Known To Petitioner Inspector Of Police, Vigilance Investigation Bureau, Adre House, Ranchi (Jharkhand) 14. Sri Prabhu Dayal S/O Not Known To Petitioner Inspector Of Police, Vigilance Investigation Bureau, Adre House, Ranchi (Jharkhand) ---------------------------------- 3. 02.09.2011 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 25.11.2008 denying his claim for promotion to the post of Inspector. 2 That the petitioner may have been in the State of Jharkhand when his juniors in the State of Bihar were promoted or granted ad hoc promotion is irrelevant. When the petitioner came to the State of Bihar on allocation of cadre and not on any request by him, he has to be given his due seniority. Once the respondents acknowledge that his juniors have been promoted nothing further survives. That the juniors may have been promoted under any orders of this Court is also of no relevance. So long as his juniors are working on a post higher than him, the petitioner does not have to demonstrate any prejudice. The respondents in their counter affidavit at para 15 have themselves acknowledge “that if the instance of any junior getting promotion comes to the light of the department, the department shall be happy to review the same”. The impugned order of the respondents dated 25.11.2008 in no uncertain terms admits that juniors to the petitioner have been promoted. The respondents are therefore now required to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion from the date that his juniors may have been promoted. Let the same be done and final orders passed within a maximum period of three months from the date of receipt and/or presentation of a copy of this order. If the petitioner has any further grievance with regard to grant of junior selection grade and senior selection grade it is expected that the authorities shall consider the same within the same period and if satisfied shall pass necessary consequential order simultaneously without waiting the petitioner to have to file another writ petition. The writ application stands disposed. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.) 3