IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.1585 of 2011 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2127 of 2007 With Interlocutory Application No. 7432 of 2011 And Interlocutory Application No. 7433 of 2011 In Letters Patent Appeal No.1585 of 2011. ====================================================== 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna 3. The Secretary cum Commissioner, Road Construction Department, Bihar, Patna 4. The Engineer in Chief cum Additional Secretary, Road Construction Department, Bihar, Vishwasaraiya Bhawan, Patna 5. The Chief Engineer (Mechanical), Mechanical Wing, Road Construction Department, Bihar, Vishwasaraiya Bhawan, Patna 6. The Superintending Engineer, Mechanical Circle, Road Construction Department, Bihar, Vishwasaraiya Bhawan, Patna 7. The Executive Engineer (Mechanical), Mechanical Division, Road Construction, Ara near Head Post Office, Ara 8. The Finance Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna .... .... Appellants / Respondents Versus Dhan Kumar Tiwary, S/o Late Ganga Narayan Tiwary, R/o Vill. - Porahen, P.O. - Parsurampur, P.S. – Krishnagarh, Via - Sinha, District - Bhojpur, (Ara), presently working as Junior Mechanical Grade II, Working as Junior Mechanic Grade -2 under Executive Engineer (Mechanical), Road Construction Division, Ara .... .... Petitioner / Respondent ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Rajeev Kumar Singh, G.P. 15 Mr. Alok Kumar Singh and Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Singh, AC to G.P. 15. For the Respondent/s : ----- ====================================================== Patna High Court LPA No.1585 of 2011 (5) dt.25-11-2011 2 / 4 2 CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 5 25-11-2011 Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 29th July 2010 passed by the learned single Judge in above CWJC No. 2127 of 2007, the respondents State of Bihar & others have preferred this Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent. The subject matter of dispute is the promotion granted to the writ petitioner, a work-charged employee, promoted as Junior Mechanic Grade II on 8th September 1979 and the order dated 17th October 2006 cancelling the said order of 8th September 1979 and the orders of further promotion. It appears that the petitioner, then a work-charged employee, was promoted as Junior Mechanic Grade II on 8th September 1979. Since his promotion, on 6th May 1982 his service was regularized. After regularization of his service, he was given the benefit of further time-bound promotion and other service benefits. After 26 years, the State Government realized that the promotion granted to the petitioner on 8th September 1979 was illegal and contrary to the rules. Consequently, by order dated 17th October 2006, the promotion order dated 8th September 1979 was cancelled, and consequently, the dates of further promotions granted to the petitioner have been re- adjusted. A direction has been issued to recover the amount of difference in salary. The challenge to the aforesaid order dated 17th October 2006 in above CWJC No. 2127 of 2007 has been upheld by the learned single Judge. Therefore, this Appeal. Learned Advocate Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Singh has Patna High Court LPA No.1585 of 2011 (5) dt.25-11-2011 3 / 4 3 appeared for the appellants - State of Bihar and officers. He has submitted that so long as the petitioner was a work-charged employee, he could not have been granted promotion. Nevertheless, the Superintending Engineer (Mechanical), contrary to the prevalent rules, promoted the petitioner under order dated 8th September 1979. The promotion made illegally and without the authority of law was liable to be set aside. We do agree; it may be that under the prevalent rules, the petitioner was not entitled to promotion so long as he was a work-charged employee; the order dated 8th September 1979 made in respect of the petitioner was illegal and was made without the authority of law. However, the State Government ought to have taken action immediately or within reasonable time. We are unable to comprehend that the State Government did not realize the illegality committed by its officer, the Superintending Engineer, for 26 years and went on granting the benefit of time- bound promotion to the petitioner and other service benefits of promotion for 26 years. In our opinion, the learned single Judge has rightly set aside the order dated 17th October 2006. Evidently under the aforesaid order dated 17th October 2006, the promotion granted to the petitioner as early as on 8th September 1979 and subsequent promotions have been set aside without giving opportunity to the petitioner to show cause. The order dated 17th October 2006 had civil consequences and the writ petitioner was entitled to make representation against such action. The said order, therefore, is vitiated for violation of principles of natural justice also. In our opinion, not only the Appeal is devoid of merit, the delay of 223 days occurred in filing the Appeal is also Patna High Court LPA No.1585 of 2011 (5) dt.25-11-2011 4 / 4 4 not satisfactorily explained. For the aforesaid reasons, the Appeal and the Interlocutory Applications are rejected. Dilip. (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)