IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8562 of 2005 DEO DUTT PRASAD Versus BIHAR STATE BOARD OF RELIGIOUS TRUST & ORS. ----------- 4 22.07.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. When the petitioner had an opportunity of substantive appointment to the next higher post which he had been granted and is not disputed then he has no right to claim time bound promotion under the 1981 circular of the State of Bihar. Provision for time bound promotion was made only for such employees who had no avenues of promotion at all. That is not the case of the petitioner. If the authorities thereafter have refused, time bound promotion they have done nothing wrong. Petitioner makes a grievance that for the period February, 1992 to till December, 1994, he has not been paid his salary by the respondents. It is too belated a claim to be entertained by this Court, more so, when the issues is being raised in the present writ application filed in the year 2005. But the court is also conscious of the fact that many institutions in the State of Bihar have not paid salary to their employees for years together and that is the primary consideration why the court is a little indulgent in this aspect of the matter. The writ application is disposed of with a direction to 2 the petitioner that he shall furnish evidence of the fact that he has not been paid or drawn salary for the period February, 1992 to December, 1994. The above aspect shall be verified from the accounts of the respondents and if what has been claimed by the petitioner is correct then they will have a responsibility to pay the same, preferably within the period of three months. If the claim of the petitioner is not found to be in order he shall be communicated the outcome by the respondents within the same time. The writ application is disposed of with the above liberty. Rajeev/- (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)