IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3864 of 2003 Dwadshi Singh, Son of Late Deoraj Singh, Resident of Village Badalpura, P.S. Chapra Mufasil, District Saran. ------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reform, Bihar, Patna. 2. The Secretary Department of Finance Government if Bihar, Patna. 3. The Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna. 4. The Collector, Patna. 5. The Deputy Collector (Establishment), Patna. 6. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Danapur, Patna. ---- Respondent ----------- 4 24.7.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. The prayer in this writ application as on date only relates to grant of Time Bound Promotion as it has been recorded in the earlier order dated 7.7.2003 in this very case that the other grievances of the petitioner with regard to grant of pay-scale have replacement pay-scale has already been redressed. Counsel for the petitioner would submit that such Time Bound Promotion to the petitioner, who was initially appointed in the year 1971 on the post of Clerk in a Muffassil office of the State of Bihar, became due with effect from 1.4.1981. Counsel for the petitioner also accepts 2 that he was not eligible for such Time Bound Promotion earlier with effect from 1.4.1981 because he had not passed the necessary Departmental (Accounts) Examination as a whole. Counsel for the petitioner also admits that in terms of the Government decision permitting relaxation from passing of such departmental examination was allowed in favour of the petitioner only in the year 1994. Obviously, if all these facts are taken to the logical conclusion, the petitioner at this stage cannot be allowed to raise such cause of action of the year 1981. There is infact no explanation for the inordinate delay of more than 22 years even on the date of filing of this writ application i.e. 17.4.2003. The only explanation given by the counsel for the petitioner that he was filing representation or getting some sort of assurances is only to be noted for its being rejected. That apart once this fact becomes admitted that the petitioner had not passed the departmental examination he can not claim his time bound promotion w.e.f. 1.4.1981. The 3 exemption from appearing in this departmental examination in 1994 also cannot lead to his retrospective time bound promotion w.e.f. 1.4.1981. This Court therefore must hold such a grievance of the petitioner for time bound promotion w.e.f. 1.4.1981 to be wholly unjustified and accordingly, this application, subject to aforementioned observations, is dismissed. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)