IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5596 of 2007 DR.SURENDRA SINGH, s/o Late Ram Nandan Singh, r/o Devraha Nagar (Nahar Par) P.O.+P.S. Islampur, District Nalanda. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Secretary, Department of Health, Medical Education and Family Welfare, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna. 3. The Deputy Secretary, Department of Health, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna. ----------- 2 23.09.2010 Having heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State as with regard to the following relief:- “(i)For commanding the respondents to forthwith grant the due promotion to the petitioner from appropriate dates keeping in mind that juniors to the petitioner have been granted such promotion. (ii)For further commanding the respondents to grant financial benefits of grant of promotions due to the petitioner alongwith suitable amount of compound interest from the dates such amounts became due to the petitioner till the date of their actual payment.” this Court is of the considered opinion that grievance as raised in this writ application stands redressed as would be evident from reading of paragraph nos. 5, 6 and 7 of the counter affidavit which is quoted hereinbelow:- “That it is respectfully stated that promotion in 20% has already been given to the petitioner vide Notification No.152 (3) dated 20.03.2009. That it is further stated that promotion in the scale of Rs.10000-15,200 has also been sanctioned vide notification no.1192 (3) dated 21.10.2008. That it is further stated that benefit of both ACP has been sanctioned vide notification no.914 (3) dated 6.11.2007.” Counsel for the petitioner would, however, urge that the consequential monetary benefit of such promotion has not yet 2 been extended to the petitioner. As a matter of fact, such oral submission of learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be looked into by this Court, but then this much has to be clarified that if juniors to the petitioner while being given the aforementioned three promotions as was also given to the petitioner, were accorded with the financial benefit, there would be no reason why the petitioner will not be paid the same. In that view of the matter, this Court would give limited liberty to the petitioner to approach the authority for payment of financial benefit in respect of the aforementioned three promotions only and if the petitioner would be able to demonstrate that juniors to him were given such promotion with financial benefit, the authorities will be required to also give such financial benefit to the petitioner as well, but if there be any compelling reason for not doing so the authority would be under obligation to pass a reasoned order for denying such financial benefit. The aforementioned action must be completed by the authority within a period of six months from the date of filing of the representation by the petitioner enclosing a copy of this order. With the aforementioned observations and directions this application is disposed of. Abhay Kumar ( Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)