IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.1475 of 1999 1. NITYA NAND PRASAD SINGH son of late Shyam Bihari Prasad, resident of village – Korma, PS Ghoshi, District Jahanabad, At Present posted as Draftman, Advance Planning & Design, Division No.1, Road Construction Deptt., Rajbanshi Nagar, Patna 2. Surendra Prasad Singh son of Chote Lal Singh, resident of Village and Post Lakhwar, PSGhoshi, District Jahanabad, At present posted as Tracer, Advance Planning and Design Division no.II, Gupta Bhawan, Road Construction Deptt., North S K Puri, Patna ……. Appellants Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Commissioner and Secretary, Road Construction Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 3. The Engineer-in-Chief, cum Additional Commissioner-cum- Special Secretary, Road Construction Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 4. The Chief Engineer, Advance Planning Wing, Road Construction Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 5. The Superintending Engineer, Advance Planning Circle, Road Construction Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 6. The Engineer-in-Chief-cum-Additional Commissioner,cum- Special Secretary, Water Resources Deptt. Govt. of Bihar, Patna 7. The Bihar Public Service Commission through its Secretary, 15 Bailey Road, Patna 8. The Secretary, Bihar Public Service Commission, 15 Bailey Road, Patna …………… Respondents ----------- 04- 6.8.2009 Heard Mr. Khurshid Alam for the appellants, Mr.Maroof Nath Roy, learned Assistant Counsel to Standing Counsel no.11 for respondent nos. 1 to 6, and Ms. Nilu Agrawal for respondent nos. 7 and 8. It is an appeal under clause 10 of the Letters Patent of the High Court of Judicature at Patna. The petitioners of CWJC No.5319 of 1998 (Nityanand Prasad Singh & Another vs. State of Bihar & Others), are aggrieved by the order dated 6.10.1999, whereby it has been held that persons of the category of the present appellants (the writ petitioners) are not entitled to promotion to the category of Junior Engineers. They have, however, been permitted to take their chance - 2 - for promotion by way of direct recruitment and shall not be subject to the rigors of age bar. 2. It appears that the petitioners are in the services of the Bihar Government where petitioner no.1 was initially appointed as Draftsman on 18.12.85, and petitioner no.2 was appointed as Tracer on 2.1.1986. While in service, they enhanced their qualification by obtaining Diploma in Civil Engineering. Circular/letter no.11211, dated 31.5.1976, of the Bihar Government had permitted that all such employees of the category like the petitioners who had completed six years of service and had obtained the Diploma in Civil Engineering, shall be entitled to be considered for promotion to the post of Junior Engineers. The petitioners staked their claim, but their case was not considered leading to the aforesaid CWJC No.5319 of 1998. The writ petition was disposed of with certain observations. Learned counsel for the writ petitioners raises a grievance before this court that the learned Single Judge has erred in disallowing the claim of promotion on the strength of the said circular dated 31.5.76. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents have made a common cause in opposing the appeal and have submitted in one voice that the learned Single Judge has erred in granting relief on the second aspect of the matter. In their submission, it has upset the functioning of the Government. 4. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. The circular dated 31.5.76 provides to the employees of the category of the petitioners - 3 - who had completed six years of service and had obtained Diploma in Civil Engineering, were entitled to be considered for promotion to the post of Junior Engineer. In fact, some of the employees of the State Government derived the benefit of promotion under the said circular. However, the State Government withdrew the said circular dt. 31.5.76, by resolution dated 9.11.87 (Annexure 5), and was substituted by new procedure for recruitment to the post of Junior Engineer. It appears on a perusal of the same that the entire recruitment thereafter would be by direct recruitment and there is now no provision for consideration for appointment by promotion from amongst the category of the petitioners. No provision of law or any other Government circular has been brought to our notice permitting such employees for consideration for promotion to the post of Junior Engineer. In that view of the matter, the order of the learned Single Judge needs modification. We, therefore, conclude that there is no longer any provision of law in force, or any Government circular in existence, whereby persons of the category of the petitioners are entitled to consideration for promotion to the post of Junior Engineer. There is also no provision for direct recruitment whereby such employees can be considered after ignoring the age bar. 5. In the result, this appeal is dismissed with the aforesaid modification in the order of the learned Single Judge. ( S K Katriar ) ( Jyoti Saran ) mrl - 4 -