IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.978 of 1997 1. RAM BILASH PRASAD, son of late Chhathoo Singh, Resident of village Chaksharifa, P.O. Alinagar Leorhan Via Chandenoatti, P.S. Baligaon, District Vaishali 2. Sachidanand Sharma, son of late Awadh Bihari Thakur, resident of village Harpur Kishun, P.O. Siho, P.S. Sakra, District Muzaffarpur 3. Radheshwar Prasad Verma, son of late Rameshwar Prasad Verma, resident of village and P.O. Sondho, P.S. Goraul, District Vaishali at present residing at Mohalla Sherpur Colony, P.O. M.I.G., Town and District Muzaffarpur 4. Gopal Prasad Verma, son of late Jadunandan Prasad Verma, resident of village and P.O. Manika, P.S. Mushahari, District Muzaffarpur … Petitioners Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Registrar, Co-operative Societies Bihar, Patna 3. The Additional Registrar, Co-operative Societies Bihar, Patna 4. The Joint Registrar (Special Cell), Co- operative Societies Bihar Patna … Respondents ----------- 10. 11.5.2011 No one appears for the petitioners. Admittedly when this writ application was filed on 27.1.1997 the petitioners having their date of birth of 26.1.1929, 28.2.1930, 8.1.1935 and 3.7.1936 had already retired from service in between January, 1987 to July, 1994. It is only after their date of retirement they could remember that they were entitled for certain promotion with effect from 1.4.1984 and 1.4.1986. There is however no explanation whatsoever for wrecking up a cause of action 2 of the year 1984 or 1986 by filing this writ application on 27.1.1997. Infact after retirement of the petitioners and payment of their full payment of retirement benefit the present writ application has been filed only for claiming monetary benefit. The respondents in fact have explained this aspect in paragraphs 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of their counter affidavit which reads as follows: “3. That with regard to 2nd time bound promotion it is humbly stated that petitioners were provided the benefit of 2nd time bound promotion vide order no. 3625 dated 31.3.1988 and order no. 5684 dated 22.6.1987 attached with writ petition and mentioned as Annexure 6 and 6/1. It will be evident after perusal of the promotion order that the promotion was provisional and conditional. The conditions were as follows: I. Promotion is being provided in anticipation of confirmation by the Finance Department. II. If Finance Department, does not confirm the 2nd time bound promotion it will be withdrawn and payment made due to this promotion will be recovered from their pay. 3 4. That similar case of promotion was sent to Finance Department for confirmation of 2nd time bound promotion. The Finance Department turned down the benefit of 2nd time bound promotion in the light of instruction laid down Finance Department resolution no. 10770 dated 30.12.1981. According to paragraph no.11 of that resolution “the benefit should not be applicable to such employee who after once joining Govt. service have for any reason been elevated to a higher pay scale by promotion, merger or even up gradation.” 5. That hence, benefit of second time bound promotion provided to the petitioners have been cancelled vide letter no. 5093 dated 8th August, 1994. 6. That petitioner nos. 1 and 2 complete 25 of qualifying service on the post of co-operative Extension Officer on 18.9.1990 and 22.9.1990 respectively. Both of then have superannuated from Government service between the year 87 to 88. So the question of providing them benefit of 2nd time bound promotion does not arise. As regard petitioners nos. 3 and 4 they are entitled for 2nd time bound promotion on completation of 25 years of qualifying service on the 4 post of Co-operative Extension Officer with effect from 19.9.1990 and 25.2.1990 respectively. Their case of promotion will be considered in then next of Departmental Promotion Committee. 7. That details of appointment of petitioners, date of superannuation, date of illigibility for 2nd time bound promotion are as follows:- Name of petitioner Date of Date of Date of appointment super- complet on the post annua ing 25 of Co-opera tion yrs of tive Exten qualifyi tion officer ng servi ce 1.Sri Ram Bilash 18.9.65 31.1.85 18.9.90 Prasad 2.Sri Sachidanand 22.9.65 29.2.88 22.9.90 3.Sri Radhe Shyam 19.9.65 31.1.93 19.9.90 Prasad 4.Gopal pd.Verma 25.2.65 31.7.94 25.2.90 8. That it will be evident from the above table that petitioners no. 1, 2, 3 and 4 complete 25 years of continuous service on the cadre post of Co-operative Extension Officer Supervisor (later on post re-named as Co-operative Extension Officer) in the year 1990 on different dates. Previously they were working as V.L.W. in the Agriculture Department whose pay scale were lesses that of Co- operative Extension Officer. So 2nd time bound promotions provided to 5 petitioners vide this office order nos. were illegal in light of principle/ instruction laid down in finance Department letter no. 10770 dated 30.12.81 and opinion given by the Finance Deptt.” In fact the respondents have also clarified in their counter affidavit that not only the petitioners no. 1, 2 and 3 were not eligible for Second Time Bound Promotion and that it is only petitioner no.4 who could claim such Second Time Bound Promotion, inasmuch as when he had completed the period of 25 years of service on 25.2.1990 he had become eligible for consideration of his Second Time Bound Promotion before his superannuation on 31.7.1994. That being so, this writ application is disposed of by holding that while petitioners no. 1, 2 and 3 will have no claim whatsoever for the Second Time Bound Promotion, petitioner no.4 if he has not been given such Second Time Bound Promotion till date, he may represent his case before the authorities and the authorities in view of the stand taken in 6 paragraph 9 of the counter affidavit reading as follows: “9. That so far promotion of petitioner no.4 is concerned he should submit representation with all details and claims before the competent authority stating therein this grievance.” will be under obligation to decide the same within a period of three months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this application is disposed of. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/