IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1373 of 1997 NARENDRA NARAYAN VERMA, S/O LATE RAM NARAYAN VERMA, RETIRED AS JOINT DIRECTOR, AGRICULTURE (PLANT PROTECTION) BIHAR, PATNA PERMANENT RESIDENT OF PURANI SARAI, POLICE STATION NATH NAGAR, DISTRICT BHAGALPUR, AT PRESENT RESIDING IN MAHENDRA LOK, FLAT NO. 101 1ST FLOOR, KANKARBAGH, ROAD NO. 2, POLICE STATION KANKARBAGH, DISTRICT PATNA. ...........PETITIONER. Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR, THROUGH THE SECRETARY AGRICULTURE, HAVING HIS OFFICE IN VIKAS BHAWAN, NEW SECRETARIAT, POLICE STATION SACHIVALAYA, DISTRICT PATNA. 2.THE ADDITIONAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT IN THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE HAVING HIS OFFICE IN VIKAS BHAWAN, NEW SECRETARIAT, POLICE STATION SACHIVALAYA, DISTRICT PATNA. ...............RESPONDENTS. ----------- 05/ 11.05.2011 No one appears for the petitioner. Counsel for the State is present. The following prayer made by the petitioner:- ' (a) That the respondents be directed to shift/modify notification no. 1557 dated 22.11.1996 by which the petitioner has been given senior selection grade on the post of Deputy Director, Agriculture (Plant Protection) in the pay scale of Rs. 3700-5000 with effect from 1.1.1994 to th eextent of 1.8.1988 on which dated petitioner was entitled to be considered for aforesaid promotion against regular sanctioned vacant post. (b) That the respondentsbe directed to consider the case of the petitioner for regular promotion in super timescale on the post of Joint Director, Agriculture(Plant Protection)with effect from 1.2.1992 in the pay scale of Rs. 4100-5300 and consequential benefit of 2 pension. (c) That the respondents be directed to pay the salary of post of Joint Director Agriculture, Plant Protection in the pay scale of Rs. 4100-5300 with effect from 30.04.1992 to the petitioner till his retirement and consequential benefit of pension.' has been suitably answered in paragraph no. 2 of the counter affidavit which reads as follows:- ' That regarding the statement made in paragraph No. 1,2,4,5,19,23,31 of the writ petition, it is stated that the fact is that the petitioner is an Officer of Bihar Agriculture Service Category-V(Plant Protection). He was promoted and given regular promotion in junior selection grade at pay scale of Rs. 3000-4500-in Bihar Agriculture Service Category-5 (Plant Protection) with effect from 1.1.1989 vide notification no. 461 dated 25.02.1992. There is a fixed Kalawadhi of 5 years for promotion to junior selection grade to senior selection grade of Bihar Agriculture Service. The petitioner completes Kalawadhi of 5 years on 1.1.1994 in Senior Selection Grade. Hence the petitioner was promoted in Senior Selection Grade with monetary benefit with effect from 1.1.1994 vide departments notification No. 1557 dated 22.11.1996 after the recommendation of departmental promotion committee. There is a fixed Kalawadhi of 3 years prior promotion to Senior Selection Grade to supertime scale. The petitioner retired before completing the Kalawadhi of 3 years, i.e. 1.1.1997. Hence the petitioner was not eligible for promotion in supertime scale. Hence the petitioners prayer in their para is totally baseless, false and misleading.' From the reading of the counter 3 affidavit, it would be clear that as the petitioner had not completed the prescribed period of Kalawadhi which is mandatory requirement for being promoted against a higher post, he could not have been given such promotion from retrospective effect. As a matter of fact, the petitioner also has not cited example of any person junior to him who have been given such promotion in Senior Selection Grade on the post of Deputy Director w.e.f. 01.08.1988. Once this aspect becomes clear that no junior to the petitioner was given promotion to the higher grade w.e.f. 01.08.1988 or on the post of Joint Director Agriculture w.e.f. 01.02.1992, he (petitioner) cannot be held to be entitled for such retrospective promotion. Respondents in fact have also clarified that the working management made by the respondents were against the post of Joint Director vide notification no. 2639 dated 30.04.1992, and the same can not be treated as promotion especially when it is also categorically mentioned that the petitioner would continue to hold the higher post in his 4 own pay scale against the substantive post held him. The petitioner in fact having retired from service even before completing the immediate three years of Kalawadhi for the post of Joint Director thus could not have been promoted and therefore, this court would find no reason to interfere with the order granting promotion to the petitioner with effect from 01.01.1994 in the Senior Selection Grade. Consequently this application fails and is, accordingly, dismissed. Ranjan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J)