CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No. 10200 OF 1992 (An application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India) UMESH PRASAD SINGH, SON OF LATE RAM GOVIND SINGH, RESIDENT OF RENTAL FLAT NO. 400, P.S.- KANKARBAGH, TOWN AND DISTRICT- PATNA. ------------------------Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, THROUGH THE SECRETARY, PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS DEPARTMENT, MAIN SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 2. UNDER SECRETARY, PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, MAIN SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 3. SECRETARY, CABINET (VIGILANCE) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, 12-A-BAILEY ROAD, PATNA. ------------------------Respondents For The Petitioner :Mr. Dhruba Mukherjee, Advocate For the respondent :G.P. 1 P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.K.KATRIAR THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL Kishore K. Mandal, J. The present writ application has been filed for a direction upon the respondents to treat the petitioner as Section Officer w.e.f. 12.2.1988. While the matter was pending for hearing an interlocutory application bearing I.A. No. 6949/1999 was filed bringing on record pendent elite developments seeking a further direction upon the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for regular promotion to the post of Registrar from the due date and/or at least from the date juniors to the petitioner have been so promoted to the next higher post of Registrar. The said application (I.A. No. 6949 of 1999) was directed to be considered at the time of final hearing. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner while pressing 2 this application confines his prayer only in respect of his claim for consideration to the post of Registrar in view of the facts/pleadings made in paragraph nos. 15, 16, 17(c) and 21. It has been submitted that the department treated the petitioner having been granted regular promotion as Section Officer w.e.f. 30.8.1988, and thereafter prepared a gradation list (Annexure- 29) wherein the name of the petitioner appears at Sl. No. 69. Petitioner accepts this position. It is contended that juniors to him in the said gradation list had been considered, and promoted to the next higher post of Registrar (Annexure-31/1) whereas the consideration of his case was deferred for want of service records. Referring to the letter dated 22.9.1995 (Annexure-30/1) and the letter dated 28.11.1995 (Annexure-30), it is submitted that all the relevant documents relating to the petitioner were duly forwarded to the Personnel Department for onward transmission to the Bihar Public Service Commission for consideration of his case. It is the submission of the petitioner that yet his case was kept pending consideration by the Departmental Promotion Committee on account of non- availability of service records, whereas the case(s) of others below him in the gradation list (Annexure-29) were considered, and they were subsequently promoted to the post of Registrar. On the strength of these submissions, it has been submitted that on non-existent ground(s), or due to culpable deficiency in due discharge of executive functioning, the case of the 3 petitioner could not be appropriately considered by the Bihar Public Service Commission and he was eluded his due promotion. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states before this court that his case was not considered only on account of non- availability of service records as there was no departmental proceeding pending against him during the relevant time. 4. The State has not filed any reply/counter affidavit to the aforesaid pleadings brought on record by way of I.A. No. 6949 of 1999. The facts, therefore, pleaded therein stand admitted by non-traverse. It is admitted position at the Bar that the petitioner superannuated from service w.e.f. 30th September, 1999 as Section Officer. 5. We find that there was no justification on the part of the respondents in keeping his matter pending consideration and making appropriate recommendations, and thereafter granting promotion to the persons junior to him in the gradation list such as Suresh Nidhi (Sl. No. 70). 7. We, therefore, allow this writ application. The State is directed to give him notional benefits of the post of Registrar with effect from the date his junior namely Suresh Nidhi was granted the promotion to the post of Registrar. The petitioner shall not be entitled to the differential amount of salary, but shall be entitled to the post-retirement benefits at the enhanced rates. Let the petitioner’s post-retirement benefits accordingly be 4 revised within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. S.K. Katriar, J: I agree. Patna High Court Dated 21st January, 2010 NAFR/pkj ( Kishore K. Mandal, J. ) (S.K. Katriar, J.)