LETTERS PATIENT APPEAL No.804 OF 2006 -------- Appeal against the judgment and order dated 28-8- 2006 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 12841 of 2005 -------- RAJKESHWAR SINGH- SON OF LATE RADHA KISHUN SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE HAKAM, P.S. MOHAMMADPUR, DISTRICT, GOPALGANJ…. APPELLANT Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE SECRETARY, PRIMARY AND ADULT EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, BIHAR, PATNA. 2. THE DISTRICT HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, PRIMARY EDUCATION BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 3. THE CHAIRMAN, ZILA PARISHAD, GOPALGANJ 4. THE DEPUTY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER, GOPALGANJ…………………………… RESPONDENTS ----------- FOR THE APPELLANT :- DR. ANIL KR UPADHAYAY MR. NARESH PD. NO.1,ADVOCATES FOR THE STATE: MR. RANJIT SINHA,A.C. TO S.C.10 ------------ P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ------------- Shiva KirtiSingh & B.P. Verma, JJ Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State. 2. Appellant preferred C.W.J.C. No. 12841 of 2005 for the relief that his claim for B.A. trained scale be allowed from a date before he superannuated from service of the Bihar Government in the year 2003. That writ petition was dismissed by the order under appeal dated 28-8-2006 not on merits but on the ground of delay because some persons junior to the petitioner were granted B.A. trained scale in the 2 year 1996. 3. On the basis of annexure-6 to the writ petition it has been submitted that the claim of the petitioner for scale in question was kept pending by the respondents because of pendency of writ petitions in this court, for deciding the correct basis for grant of B.A. trained scale and as to how the seniority list ought to be prepared by the State. This fact is not in dispute and it is clear that L.P.A. of the year 1996 and some later writ petitions have been recently disposed of by a Full Bench of this Court on 21-4-2009 and that judgment is reported in the case of Ram Nath Prasad Singh Vrs. The State of Bihar, ( 2009) 3 PLJR 384). 4. When the authorities had kept the claim of the appellant/petitioner pending on account of pendency of some cases directly relevant for deciding the issue and when in those cases interim orders had also been passed to maintain status quo, in our considered view the writ petition should not have been dismissed on the ground of delay alone. In that view of the matter we have heard the parties on merits. 5. It is not in dispute that the principle for preparation of the relevant seniority list for B.A. trained teachers for the purpose of grant of scale now stands settled by a Full Bench in the judgment noticed above. Paragraph 9 of that judgment is relevant as it contains positive directions to the respondent-State and runs as follows:- “ Separate seniority lists for promotion to Grade-4 for Arts and Science teachers afresh and thereafter to prepare a consolidated list for promotion as expeditiously as possible. The draft list should be published within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and the final seniority list shall be thereafter published for promotions and transfers made in accordance with law” 6. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that this 3 appeal should be allowed and disposed of in terms of aforesaid judgment in the case of Ram Nath Prasad Singh (supra). Learned counsel for the State has no objection. 7. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed in terms of judgment and order of the Full Bench noticed above. The case of the appellant should be considered by the authority appropriate in the light of directions given in the aforesaid Full Bench judgment. It goes without saying that since the appellant superannuated in the year 2003, the authorities should act in the matter expeditiously so that case of the appellant and other similarly situated persons may be considered without any delay, preferably within six months. Patna High Court Patna Dated the 16th July, 2010 NAFR Naresh ( Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) ( B.P. Verma, J)