IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.1271 of 2011 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 537 of 2009 ====================================================== Maheshwar Das, S/o Late Bal Govind Das, Resident of Village-Naya Bigha, P.S. Barh, District-Patna, presently Resident at 287-M.I.G. Lohiya Nagar, Kankarbagh, P.S. Kankarbagh, District-Patna. .... Appellant.... Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Commissioner-Cum-Secretary, Department of Home, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Director General of Police, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Inspector General of Police (H.Q. and Administration, Bihar, Patna). 4. Deputy Secretary (Home) Police Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. .... Respondents .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant : Mr. Chandrashekhar Pd. Singh, Sr. Advocate with Mr. S.R. Sharan, Advocate For the Respondent-State: Mr. Manoj Kumar, A.C. to S.C. 6 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 2 20-09-2011 Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 24th June 2011 made by the learned single Judge in above CWJC No.537 of 2009, the writ petitioner has preferred the present Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent. The petitioner, a retired Deputy Superintendent of Police, has filed above CWJC No. 537 of 2009 under Article 226 of the Constitution to challenge seniority in the cadre of Police Patna High Court LPA No.1271 of 2011 (2) dt.20-09-2011 2 Inspector and to claim consequent promotion in the cadre of Deputy Superintendent of Police. The learned single Judge has rejected the claim as barred by principles of res judicata . Therefore, the present Appeal. It is not in dispute that earlier the appellant approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in CWJC No. 5149 of 1999 claiming seniority in the cadre of Police Inspector from the date he was officiating as Police Inspector and consequent promotion to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police. The appellant’s claim was rejected by this Court. The Court held that the seniority would count from the date of selection by the department of promotion committee and actual promotion in 1978. The Court also observed that on the basis of 1978 seniority as Police Inspector, the appellant was promoted as Deputy Superintendent of Police in 1992. The said judgment has attained finality. It appears that since the above referred decision in CWJC No. 5149 of 1999, the appellant made a fresh representation in respect of his promotion as Deputy Superintendent of Police. That representation came to be rejected by the concerned authority in 2008. Feeling aggrieved the appellant filed above CWJC No.537 of 2009. Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Chandreshekhar Prasad Singh has appeared for the appellant. He has submitted that earlier writ petition was in respect of appellant’s seniority in the cadre of Police Inspector. The judgment in the said writ petition will not constitute res judicata. Learned single Judge has erred in Patna High Court LPA No.1271 of 2011 (2) dt.20-09-2011 3 dismissing the writ petition as barred by res judicata. He has submitted that since the decision in CWJC No. 5149 of 1999 several Deputy Superintendents of Police Junior to the appellant were granted deemed promotion from 1987 and 1992. The appellant has, therefore, fresh cause of action to claim promotion as Deputy Superintendent of Police prior to 1992. We have carefully perused the pleadings. Though the contention that certain Deputy Superintendents of Police were granted deemed promotion from 1987 or 1992 has been raised, the contention has not been supported by relevant materials. In our opinion, learned single Judge has rightly dismissed the writ petition as barred by res judicata. No case for interference is made out. Appeal is dismissed in limine. Anjani /- (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)