IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2986 of 2006 RAM LAKHAN BHAKTA S/O LATE RAM PALAK BHAKTA, R/O VILLAGE SEHAN PO- SEHAN PS- GORAUIL DISTT- VAISHALIA- PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR,THROUGH AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, PATNA 2. THE DIRECTOR AGRICULTURE, DEPARMTNET OF AGRICULTURE, PATNA 3. THE DIRECTOR ADMINISTRATION (AGRICULTURE) DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, PATNA 4. THE JOINT DIRECTOR AGRICULTURE-CUM-CONTROLLER, WEIGHTS & MEASURES, RAZA BAZAR, SHEIKHPURA, PO- VETNARY COLLEGE, PS. SHEIKHPURA, DISTT- PATNA 5. THE COLLECTOR, PATNA 6. ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, BIHAR, PATNA ----------- 2 13.1.2009 Heard learned counsel for the parties. I.A. No. 2178 of 2008 has been filed challenging the order dated 19.6.2006 contained in annexure-24 by virtue of which the respondent authorities have decided to change the date of 2nd time bound promotion granted to the petitioner. The I.A. is allowed. According to the petitioner the impugned order is arbitrary and erroneous for the reasons that the same has come to be passed after almost six years of his retirement and that too without giving him opportunity of hearing in this regard. Petitioner had earlier been granted time bound promotions 1st and 2nd by different notifications and the benefit of the same had accrued to the petitioner all along but only after retirement the said impugned order dated 19th June, 2006 has come to be issued. In the counter affidavit the respondents have justified the decision. They have categorically stated that the petitioner was granted promotion on the post of Inspector Weights - 2 - and Measures on 6.11.1965 vide order no. 16417 and the 2nd time bound promotion to the petitioner will accrue from the year 1965 and not from an earlier date when he was initially appointed on the post of Grading Inspector on 21.1.1964. In the opinion of this Court since the earlier order granting time bound promotion was a provisional order and only on scrutiny of the records this fact has emerged, necessary correction and corrigendum vide order dated 19th June, 2006 has come to be issued. This court does not find any illegality in the order even though it has been passed after his retirement. This writ application has no merit. It is dismissed accordingly. RPS (Ajay Kumar Tripathi,J.)