IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.149 of 2011 PRAMOD BIHARI ASTHANA, son of Sri Mathura Prasad, resident of Road No.13B, Rajendra Nagar, P.S. Kadamkuan, at & District: Patna... ...Petitioner-Appellant Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Chief Secretary, 2. Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Road Construction Department, Vishveshvaraiyah Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna, 3. The Joint Secretary to the Government, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Vishveshvaraiyah Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna... ....Respondents..Respondents ............ 4 03.05.2011 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the State. The writ Court has allowed the writ petition in substance and has directed to allow promotion to the writ petitioner, the appellant, with effect from the date his juniors were so promoted or from the date the DPC made their recommendation for promotion. The writ petitioner/appellant is aggrieved by that part of the judgment which denies him monetary benefits of such promotion for the period prior to superannuation. The writ Court has directed that promotion shall be notional so far as salary is concerned but it will result into all the permissible pensionary benefits to the appellant from the date he retired from service. 2 Learned counsel for the State has submitted that promotion of the appellant was withheld by adopting sealed cover procedure because of pendency of private complaint cases against him. According to him, the circular of the State of Bihar dated 11.9.2002 permits the State authorities to consider the claim for monetary benefits only in the appropriate cases on receipt of representation. He has no objection if the appellant is granted liberty to file a representation which will be considered by the authorities as per their discretion on the basis of relevant facts. On the other hand, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the writ Court has ordered for release of order of promotion to the appellant from an earlier date because it was found that sealed cover procedure could not have been applied when there was no police case leading to investigation by Police and submission of charge-sheet resulting into cognizance. The relevant circular dated 11.9.2002 contains explanation that criminal proceeding would be deemed to be pending only on the date when charge-sheet is submitted. Submission of charge-sheet is by the police after completing investigation into a Police case. 3 Be that as it may, since the order of the writ Court directing for release of order of promotion is not in dispute in this appeal, it has to be construed that petitioner/appellant was wrongly denied promotion vis-a- vis his juniors and, therefore, he has been granted promotion with effect from an earlier date. In such a situation, to deprive the appellant of monetary benefits of such promotion would tantamount to punishment for no fault. In that view of the matter, the limited prayer in this appeal for grant of monetary benefits of salary etc. to the appellant consequent upon release of order of promotion with retrospective effect is allowed. The order under appeal shall stand modified accordingly. The appeal is allowed only to the aforesaid extent. Sanjay-II (Shiva Kirti Singh, J) ( Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J)