IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.952 of 2004 RAM SEVAK PRASAD SINGH SON OF LATE BHUMI PRASAD SINGH RESIDNET OF VILLAGE DHAPRI, P.S. HAWELI KHARAGPUR, DISTRICT MUNGER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE SECRETARY- CUM-COMMISSIONER, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2. ENGINEER-IN-CHIEF, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. CHIEF ENGINEER, MECHANICAL WING, ROAD CONSTRRUCTION DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 4. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER (MECHANICAL) MECHANICAL WING NATIONAL HIGHWAY, PATNA. 5. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (MECHANICAL), NATIONAL HIGHWAY MECHANICAL DIVISION, MUZAFFARPUR. ----------- 4 30/06/2010 Petitioner is a work charged employee. He made a claim upon the respondents to grant him promotion on the post of Batching Plant Operator. Respondents have not obliged the petitioner. Petitioner has been categorically told by atleast two communications, one contained in annexure-1 and the other by way of annexure-2 that he has no claim for such a promotion as there is no post vacant to be filled up by promotion. In fact, annexure-1 very clearly states that for work charged employees if they are taken on regular establishment, then they carry that post till the age of their superannuation or death. Since the post is co-terminus with - 2 - the holder of the post, there is no regular chain or promotion available for the petitioner merely because a person occupying that post has since then either died or superannuated. The two communications are being challenged by the petitioner supplemented by certain averments in the writ application that there are atleast three persons who have been granted benefit of the kind whereas petitioner has been discriminated and, therefore, Article 14 of the Constitution is being violated. The names and details of such persons are indicated in paragraphs 6,7 and 8. Reason for rejection of the claim of the petitioner is not faulty. Therefore, the two annexures do not require interference by this Court in any manner but if respondents have accommodated some persons and left the petitioner out, as has been alleged, then it is a matter of verification of their facts and records which can be best done by the concerned respondents. This writ application is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner that let him file an application with the details of those persons who have been extended benefit as - 3 - alleged by the petitioner which shall be verified by them and the outcome of the verification shall be communicated to the petitioner within a reasonable time frame after filing of application by the petitioner along with a copy of this order. This writ application stands disposed of with the observation as above. AMIN (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)