IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.302 of 2011 VIVEKANAND CHOUDHARY, son of late Lalit Narain Choudhary, resident of village Kulharia, P.O. Surihari, P.S. Amarpur, District Bhagalpur … Petitioner- Appellant Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 2. The Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 3. The Secretary, Finance Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 4. The Commissioner, Bhagalpur Division, Bhagalpur 5. The Accountant General, Bihar Birchand Patel Path, Patna-1 … Respondents-Respondents ----------- 3. 23.03.2011 Heard Mr. Nand Gopal Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State. Assailing the order of the learned Single Judge dated 22nd April, 2010 in CWJC No. 6432/2005 Mr. Mishra has contended that the main relief of the appellant-writ petitioner as with regard to making his promotion retrospective with effect from 1.1.1996 despite being raised by him in the connected writ petition was not decided and on account of that the appellant-writ petitioner stands deprived of substantial amount of salary and consequential post retirement benefit. We have perused the relief sought by the 2 petitioner in the connected writ application and from reading of the same it is absolutely clear that no grievance whatsoever was raised much less any relief prayed for as with regard to making his date of promotion retrospective with effect from 1.1.1996. As a matter of fact, the challenge in the writ application was to an order dated 3.9.2004 by which his pension was reduced from Rs.4075 to Rs.3924 with consequential recovery of the alleged excess amount. The learned single Judge in fact has allowed the writ application to that extent by holding that no recovery could be made from the salary already paid to the petitioner. Once this Court would, therefore, come to the conclusion that the date of promotion was not subject matter of the connected writ application it would not allow the petitioner now to make out a new case at the appellate stage. That being so, this appeal is wholly misconceived and is, accordingly, dismissed. Surendra (T. Meena Kumari, J.) (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.) 3