IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.2910 of 2010 1. Nitu Kumari wife of Sri Hanumant Lal, Resident of village- Narsand, P.S. Haspura, District- Aurangabad (Bihar) 2. Hanumant Lal, Constable No. 031454761, E/110 Batalian in C.R.P.F. (Nizamabad) Andhara Pradesh … … Petitioners Versus 1. The Union Of India 2. Mr. K.R. Reddy, the Inspector General of Police, C.R.P.F. Group Centre, Hydrabad, District- Hydrebad, State- Andhra Pradesh 3. Mr. R. Kes, The Deputy Inspector General of Police, C.R.P.F. Group Centre, A Lanka, Bangalore, District Bangalore, State- Karnataka 4. Mr. Balram Behora, The Commandent, 110 Batalian C.R.P.F., Subhash Nagar, District Nizamabad, State- Andhra Pradesh, present Address- 110, Batalian, C.R.P.F. Ianepura, District- Awantipur (Jammu Kashmir). 5. Mr. Bijay Kumar, The Company Commander, E/ Company- 110 Batalian C.R.P.F., P.O. Kata Ram (Police Station), District – Karim Nagar, State- Andhra Pradesh ----------- For the Petitioners :Mr. Ajay Kumar, Advocate For the Union of India :Mr. Shiv Kumar (CGC) 04/ 05.05.2011 In compliance of the orders of the High Court dated 4.1.2010 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 13598 of 2009, request of the petitioner no.2 for grant of promotion has been rejected under order dated 19.5.2010 observing that he is unfit for grant of permission to appear in the aptitude test for Radio Operator Basic Course, as his service record is not clean. In support of such finding, reliance has been placed on the three punishments imposed on the petitioner no.2, i.e. confinement to lines for 28,10 days from 2 18.12.2006 to 14.1.2007 and 27.3.2009 to 5.4.2009 as also censure imposed on 20.6.2009 for missing the identity card. Confinement to lines was awarded to the petitioner for over staying leave. In the service period, petitioner no.2 having over stayed leave on two occasions, may be for justifiable reason, in my opinion, should not be deprived of the chance of promotion for the remainder of the service period. Such order, however, can be passed only when order refusing promotion dated 19.5.2010 is challenged by the petitioner by filing another writ petition. This contempt petition is, accordingly, disposed of granting liberty to the petitioners to challenge order dated 19.5.2010. Arjun/ ( V. N. Sinha, J.)