IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA --- CWJC No.2218 of 2009 --- 1. Union Of India through General Manager, North Eastern Railway, Gorakhpur 2. Divisional Railway Manager, North Eastern Railway, Samastipur ……… Petitioners Vs. 1. Shyam Sundar Jha s/o late Sattan Jha, r/o village, post office and police station – Phulparas, District – Madhubani, presently posted as Pointsman North Eastern Railway, Vachaspati Nagar, Post Office – Andhra Thadi, Madhubani 2. Suresh Prasad Verma s/o late Sheoji Prasad, r/o village – Rajipur, P.O. & P.S. – Dhaka, District – Champaran (East), working as Cabinman under Station Superintendent, North Eastern Railway, Bhelwa, East Champaran 3. Ganga Prasad s/o Parmeshwar Rai, r/o village Jitwarpur Nizamat, P.O. – Samastipur College Samastipur, District – Samastipur, presently working as Cabinman under Station Superintendent, North Eastern Railway, Laheriasarai, Darbhanga …….. Respondents ----------- For the petitioner: Mr. Anil Singh, Advocate For the respondents: Mr. Sudhir Singh, Asst. SG --- 2 28-2-2009 This application has been filed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 9.7.2008 passed by the Patna Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No.462 of 2002, whereby the application filed by applicants – respondents herein has - 2 - been allowed. Short facts giving rise to the present application are that by order dated 1.10.2001 respondents were denied promotion to the post of Assistant Station Master on the ground that they had not passed the psychological test which is necessary for promotion to the said post. They challenged the aforesaid order before the Patna Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”), inter alia, contending that condition of passing the psychological test shall not be applicable in their case because the Circular which had provided for passing of the said examination cannot be operated retrospectively. This found favour with the Tribunal and in this connection it has observed as follows: “That is, because every statutory rule is prospective unless it expressly or by necessary implications made to have retrospective effect. It is not the case of the respondents that the circular of 1998 has retrospective effect. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the conditions of passing the psychological test is not applicable in the instant case, and promotion on the post of ASM cannot be denied on this ground.” Mr. Anil Singh, appearing for the petitioners - 3 - submits that once respondents had appeared in the psychological test and have failed, they cannot contend that passing of the psychological test is not necessary. He does not dispute that the Circular providing for passing the psychological test shall not be applicable in the case of respondents but according to him once they had chosen to appear in the examination, later on cannot question their non-promotion on the ground that they had not passed the said examination. We do not find any substance in the submission of Mr. Singh. Condition of passing the psychological test was not necessary so far as these respondents are concerned as the Circular, which had provided for passing the said examination, did not operate restropectively. Therefore, respondents cannot be denied promotion only on the ground that they had appeared in the examination of the psychological test and failed. Passing of such examination was not necessary for them. We are of the opinion that the Tribunal did not commit any error while passing the impugned order. - 4 - We do not find any merit in the application. It is dismissed in limine. Neyaz/- C. K. Prasad, ACJ. Dharnidhar Jha, J.