IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.46 of 2009 Harendra Kumar Singh s/o late Sheojee Singh, r/o village & P.O. – Harpur P.S. Ekma, District – Chhapra (Saran) ….Appellant Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through the Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna 2. Director General of Police, Bihar Main Secretariat, Patna 3. The Inspector General of Police, (Administration) main Secretariat, Patna 4. The Deputy Inspector General of Police (Personnel), Main Secretariat, Patna ….Respondents Ist party 5. Rameshwar Prasad s/o late Munshi Mahto, r/o village Laloo Bigha, P.O. Karai, P.S. Bind, Nalanda 6. Bachcha Pd. Singh, s/o late Basudeo Singh, r/o village & P.O. Gyaspur, Muzaffarpur ……….. Respondent 2nd party ----------- For the appellant: Mr. Nawal Kishor Prasad, Advocate For the State : Mr. Maruth Nath Roy, AC to SC XI 8 8/9/2009 Heard Mr. Nawal Kishor Prasad, counsel for the appellant and Mr. Maruth Nath Roy, counsel for the State respondents. Out of three petitioners, who had filed CWJC. No.3033 of 2002, the present appeal has been filed by Harendra Kumar Singh, petitioner no.2. The first petitioner has retired in the meantime and the third petitioner of the said writ petition has been transferred to Jharkhand. 2 The question relates to seniority in the Cadre of ASI is involved in the matter. It is not in dispute that the Supreme Court had clarified the legal position and directed the Government to complete the exercise of fixing the seniority as per decision in the case of State of Bihar Vrs. Kameshwar Prasad Singh, reported in 2000 (3) PLJR (SC) 81. Under these circumstances, the single judge has disposed of the writ petition by observing as follows: “A perusal of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Bihar Vs. Kameshwar Prasad Singh (supra) shows that the Supreme Court took the considered view that promotion on officiating basis with clear stipulation that the seniority in the rank is to be reckoned from the date of his final selection under the Rules, cannot confer seniority from the date of officiation. It further held that when initial appointment is ad hoc and not according to rules and made as a stop gap arrangement the officiation on such post cannot be taken into account for considering seniority. On the basis of aforesaid decision the relevant gradation list has been revised by the respondent authorities of the State of Bihar and already circulated to the employees. This court has been informed that petitioners have filed their objections. It is clear that the impugned orders are based upon the seniority as revised by the State and objection of the employees in respect of such seniority list if pending is expected to be considered in accordance with law. It goes without saying that 3 if petitioners or anybody similarly situated is entitled to correction in the seniority list and consequential benefit at a later date, he would be entitled to claim such benefit in accordance with law. At present this court is of the view that reasons mentioned in Annexure -10 as well as Annexure –A cannot be faulted and therefore petitioner’s reversion on the post of A.S.I. and revision of their seniority in the post of A.S.I. cannot be interfered with. However, seniority matter, as observed earlier is left open and if the seniority list is revised on account of objection or any judicial order, its benefit may be available to the persons who object and succeed. The writ petition is dismissed with the aforesaid observation.” The said order is being questioned in the present appeal. From the order passed by the learned single judge, it is apparent that several objections have been filed by different affected persons which are still pending before the State Government. Learned counsel for the State has submitted that the matter is still under consideration before appropriate authority and a final decision is expected to be taken keeping in view various observations made by the Supreme Court and the representations made by the various persons. 4 In these circumstances, we do not think that any useful purpose will be served by keeping the matter pending here. Accordingly, at this stage we dispose of the appeal with observation that after the matter relating to seniority is finalized, the present appellant, if feels still aggrieved by any such seniority list, can approach the appropriate authority in accordance with law at that stage. It is expected that appropriate decision relating to seniority should be taken as expeditiously as possible preferably within three months. With the aforesaid observation, this appeal is disposed of. Neyaz/ (P.K.Misra, CJ.) (Anjana Prakash, J.)