IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15774 of 2009 1. SHYAM KUMAR SINGH S/O LATE BAL MUKUND SINGH, R/O VILL- AMMAPALI, P.S- PIRPPAITI, DISTT- BHAGALPUR, AT PRESENT WORKING AS ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR, DISTT- KISHANGANJ, BIHAR Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PERSONAL AND TRADING. GOVT. OF INDIA, NEW DELHI 2. THE UNION PUBLIC COMMISSION THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN, GHAULPURA HOUSE, SAHJAHAN ROAD, NEW DELHI 3. THE STATE OF BIHAR, THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 5. THE DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER, PATNA, DISTRICT- PATNA 6. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, KAIMUR AT BHABHUA, DISTT- KAIMUR ----------- For the Petitioner:- Mr. Dinesh Kumar Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Prabhat Ranjan, Adv. For the Respondents (BPSC) :- Mr. Kaushal Kumar Jha, Adv. For the State :- Mr. Sajal Kr. Sinha, A.C. to G.P. 17 -------------------- 2. 18.12.2009 Learned counsel at the outset prays for leave to delete respondent nos. 1 and 2 from the cause title. Let him do so at his own risk. The petitioner seeks expunction of the adverse remarks in his annual confidential report for the year 2004-05 and for the year 2005-06. It is his case that such adverse remarks are prejudicing the consideration of his case for promotion from the Bihar Administrative Service to the Indian Administrative Service. The petitioner is stated to have filed a representation as contained in Annexures 6 ‘series’ and 7 to this application for expunction of the adverse 2 remarks. It is the case of the petitioner that till date no recommendations have been made by the State Government of names to be considered for such promotion to the Indian Administrative Service. This writ application is disposed with the observation that let the representation of the petitioner be considered and decided by a reasoned and speaking order, expeditiously in a manner that his claim to be considered for promotion in the Indian Administrative Service is not rendered infructuous by sheer inaction on part of the respondents. Should the respondents do so and the petitioner ultimately succeeds in his challenge to the adverse confidential report made against him, his name shall be deemed to have been incorporated in the correct place in the recommendation that may be made by the State Government without consideration of his representation. Should such a situation arise, the entire issue on the administrative side with regard to the respondents of the circumstances under which the representation of the petitioner continued to remain pending despite the observations of this Court may also fall for consideration. Learned counsel for the State is right in his submission that the present order shall remain 3 circumscribed on facts in its application only if the recommendation has not already been sent to the Union of India. If the recommendation has already been sent by the State Government to the Union Public Service Commission, the writ application shall be deemed to have become infructuous. The writ application stands disposed. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)