IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.152 of 2010 1. Umesh Yadav S/O Late Manohar Prasad R/O Vill- Bansi, P.O- Bhera Pakar, P.S=- Dewariya, Distt- Dewariya, At Present Residing At National High Way Division, Begumpur, L.R.P. Colony, P.S- Motihari Nagar, Distt- East Champaran Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Principal Secretary, Public Works Department, Bihar, Patna 3. The Engineer-In-Chief Special Secretary-Cum-Additinal Commissioner, Road Construction Deprtment, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 4. The Chief Engineer, National High Way Wing, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 5. The Superintending Engineer, N.H. Circle, Muzafarpur 6. The Executive Engineer N.H. Divisin, Motihari 7. The Establishment Committee Of N.H. Circle, Muzaffarpur, Represented Through The Superintending Engineer, .N.H.Circle, Muzaffarpur 3/ 19/08/2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 10.12.2009 cancelling the promotion granted to him on the post of treasure guard by order dated 7.8.2006. The petitioner has himself annexed a show cause notice dated 29.7.2008 asking him to explain why he be not reverted as the promotion was contrary to procedures inasmuch as no roster clearance had been obtained, he had not cleared the examination nor was it cleared by the Establishment Committee but the then Executive Engineer himself granted the promotion which was contrary to the law. No material has been 2 placed on behalf of the petitioner what reply was submitted to it of how and why the grounds mentioned in the show cause notice were wrong. The respondents in their counter affidavit have supported the action to submit that if the promotion was wrong and the petitioner has not been able to justify that the order of promotion was in accordance with law this Court may not interfere. On 18.5.2010 the Court had stayed recovery of the payments that may have been made. If the respondents propose to make any recovery in pursuance of the present order, they are naturally required to do so in easy installments and in consultation with the petitioner keeping in mind that his resources itself may be meager given his status. The writ application is dismissed. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)