IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12171 of 2008 Indu Bharti, wife of Vijay Kishore Chaudhary, resident of Bahadurpur Housing Colony, P.O. & P.S. Bahadurpur, District Patna……………………Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar. 2. The Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Department of Health and Family Welfare, Bihar, Patna. 3. The Director-in-Chief, Health Services, Health Directorate, New Secretariate, Patna-15. 4. The Deputy Director, Health Services, Health Directorate, New Secretariate, Patna. 5. The Superintendent, Government Ayurvedic College and Hospital, Kadamkuan, Patna-3. 6. Secretary, Personnel and Administrative Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 7. The Finance Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Finance Department, Old Secretariat, Patna-1………………………………………………………………………Respondents ---------------------------------- 2 12.08.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State. Petitioner has filed this writ application for quashing of the order dated 26.05.2006 issued by respondent no.5, as contained Annexure-1, by which she has been promoted as Nurse Grade I with effect from 26.05.2006 in stead of 31.08.1993 when, as per her case, she had become eligible for the same. It appears that the petitioner had moved this Court earlier for her promotion through CWJC No. 6206 of 1998. 2 The said writ application was disposed of on 27.07.1999, vide order as contained in Annexure-2, in which statement of the learned counsel for the State was noticed that procedure for promotion to selection grade scale was in process and the same was likely to be completed within 3-4 months. It appears that in the process petitioner has been granted promotion by the impugned order, but with effect from 26.05.2006. The grievance of the petitioner is that had her case been considered in 1993 under old policy for promotion, she would have got it as she was eligible at that very time having already rendered the qualifying period of service in the lower grade. The same having not been done, petitioner was deprived of the benefits and on the ground of change of policy, her promotion has got delayed. It appears that since old policy for promotion had changed from 01.01.1996 and earlier writ application of the petitioner was disposed of after that date directing the respondents to 3 complete the process within six months and in the meantime, benefits under the old policy could not have been granted to her. In the circumstances, case of the petitioner could be considered only under new policy, and not under old policy, which has been considered and she has been granted promotion. Since petitioner was appointed on 31st August, 1987 obviously she did not become eligible for grant of time bound promotion during the period scheme was in operation. However, learned counsel for the petitioner rightly submits that petitioner has become eligible for grant of promotion under the A.C.P. scheme which may be granted to her. In the circumstances, the writ application is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider entitlement of the petitioner for grant of benefits under the A.C.P. scheme in accordance with law and grant the same to her as expeditiously as possible and preferably within three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of 4 this order with all consequential benefits to which she may be found entitled. The writ application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. BT (J. N. Singh, J.)