IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12856 of 2005 DIN BANDHU MAHARAJ SON OF LATE SACHCHITANAND MAHARAJ RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MADHURAPUR, P.S. BIDDUPUR DISTRICT VAISHALI. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL CUM INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, SPECIAL BRANCH, BIHAR, PATNA. 4. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, C.I.D. (CRIME), BIHAR, PATNA. 5. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, C.I.D. CRIME BRANCH, BIHAR AT PATNA. 6. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (A) SPECIAL BRANCH, BIHAR, PATNA. ----------- 4 06/09/2010 When the writ application was initially filed by the petitioner, he wanted three reliefs, prayer thereof has been made in sub-paragraphs I, II & III of paragraph 1 of the writ application. Petitioner now states that he does not want to press so far as I & II reliefs are concerned but is confining himself to the issue of grant of selection grade and the benefits accruing therefrom. Claim of the petitioner is that he came to enjoy the benefit of the promoted post of Sub Inspector of Police based on many rounds of litigations which traveled to this Court, primarily from the issue whether the ad-hoc promotion given to the petitioner and other - 2 - persons like him on the basis of officiation could continue to work in his favour for seniority and for benefits from the promoted post. Case of the petitioner is that a judicial order did come to be passed in his favour and the petitioner was allowed to continue on the post of Sub Inspector of police which would be evident from the notification issued in annexure-2. Though he does not deny that it was a conditional order subject to final decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. It is the stand of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the S.L.P. filed against the order of the High Court was dismissed and the matter came to rest. If that is so, petitioner must get the benefit of promotion of selection grade which he is claiming now in the present writ application. Stand of the State is that there is no question of granting selection grade to the petitioner now when he has already superannuated in the year 2003 specially keeping in mind the long drawn out battle which carried on in a related issue and in light of the decision which finally came to be rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the similar circumstance which is the case of - 3 - State of Bihar and others Vs. Kameshwar Prasad Singh and another reported in A.I.R. 2000 S.C., 2306. There is a narration in various counter affidavits filed on behalf of the State that at no point of time petitioner was allowed to draw the benefit of higher post on regular basis. Promotions were given on ad-hoc basis but the same came to be undone on many occasions between the year 1970 and 1989. Petitioner never worked on the post of Sub Inspector of Police on a substantive basis as he could not be given regular promotion on the basis of the State Seniority list. It is the case of the respondents that no person junior to the petitioner has been given this benefit of pay scale i.e. being the so called selection grade. The decision taken by the respondents was in light of the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court which categorically held that benefit of promotion on officiating basis cannot accrue to persons without following the procedure laid down in this regard. Substantive right of promotion accrues from the Rules which governs such issue and the ad-hoc promotion and seniority based on officiation can never form the basis for continuance of such benefit of - 4 - promotion. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Bihar (Supra) had occasion to take notice of this fact that many a persons who were otherwise senior to one of those petitioners were denied the benefit of seniority because the High Court in its earlier order did not care to implead all such persons as party to the writ application or issued them notice and heard them before certifying the reliefs in favour of the petitioners in the dispute before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Keeping the background that the decision of the High Court of giving benefits of promotion and seniority on the basis of officiation had up-turned the entire list of seniority of a large number of persons working on the post of Sub Inspector of Police or Deputy Superintendent of Police running into hundreds, the Apex Court rendered its decision in the case of Kameshwar Prasad Singh (Supra) based on which the seniority had to be re- worked by the respondents whose promotion was granted on officiating basis. Even though learned counsel for the petitioner relies on the decision rendered in the case of Madan Mohan Pathak Vs. Union of India, A.I.R. 1978 S.C., - 5 - 803 on the principle that once benefit has accrued by a judicial order, the same cannot be undone. In this regard this Court can only observe that yet another decision rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in identical circumstance which lays down the law cannot be ignored whatever be the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Madan Mohan Pathak (Supra) since the respondents do not have the freedom to violate the principal laid down in this regard in an identical case. Taking into consideration that the petitioner was never allowed to work on the post of Sub Inspector of Police on a substantive basis the benefit of selection grade cannot be allowed. No case for any direction is made out in this regard. This writ application is thus dismissed. AMIN/ (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)