IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14540 of 2004 YOGENDRA PRASAD SINHA, Son of late Rameshwar Prasad, Retired Account Assistant, resident of village – Chabilathika, P.O. – Belaw, P.S. – Barbigha, District – Sheikhpura. --------------- Petitioner. Versus 1. Bihar State Electricity Board through its Chairman. 2. Secretary, B.S.E.B. Vidyut Bhawan Bailey Road, Patna. 3. Financial Controller, Bihar State Electricity Board, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna. 4. Director of Accounts, Bihar Electricity Board, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna. 5. Joint Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna. 6. Accounts Officer, Transmission Circle, Bihar Sharif, Nalanda. ------------- Respondents. ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Ajit Kumar, Adv. For the B.S.E.B. : Mr. Shubhash Kishore Verma, Adv. Mr. Krishna Kant Tiwari, Adv. ----------- 6 27.01.2009 Petitioner approached the High Court in the present writ application because by virtue of an order dated 07.03.2003, as contained in Annexure – 6 to the writ application, a sum of Rs. 60,016.80 paise was sought to be recovered from the gratuity of the petitioner because he continued to remain on the post of Accounts Assistant till his retirement, despite an order of cancellation of provisional promotion to a large number of similarly situated employees, having been passed on 15.12.1984 as would be evident from Annexure – A. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he had no knowledge of the said order and since he continued to work on the post he should be given benefit. The order contained in Annexure – A to the counter affidavit has been passed based on decisions of the Supreme Court and judgment of the High Court. The order relates to a - 2 - large number of similarly situated employees. Petitioner’s stand that he had no knowledge is difficult to be accepted by this court in the above background. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that some other persons after having served for more than 12 years had been given the benefit of promotion and in fact, there is certain circulars of the Board where exemption from passing the departmental examination was granted. If it is so, then the court is inclined to allow the petitioner to establish these facts before the competent authority and get adjudication on the issue. The Court is not inclined in the present set of facts to pass final opinion against the impugned Annexure – 6 of the writ application. The writ application is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent authority to establish his claim with supporting materials on the issue, who shall be obliged to pass an order preferably within a period of three months from the date of filing of such claim. The writ application stands disposed of with above liberty. Rajeev/ (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)