IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1596 of 2010 1. SURESH PD. SHUKLA S/O HARIHAR PD. SHUKLA R/O MOHALLA- NAYA TOLA, BIHARI, P.O. + P.S. + DISTT.- JAMUI Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES, SINCHAI BHAWAN, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER MUNGER 3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, BHAGALPUR 4. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER IRRIGATION CIRCLE NO.2, JAMUI 5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER IRRIGATION DIVISION NO.2, JAMUI 6. THE TREASURY OFFICE JAMUI 7. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, BIHAR BIR CHAND PATEL PATH, PATNA ----------- 2/ 30/07/2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents. The petitioner is stated to have superannuated from service on 29.2.2004 from the post of Correspondence Clerk. By an order dated 12.12.2007 he had been granted first and second time bound promotion with effect from 01.04.1981 and 30.01.1993 respectively and his pay scale fixed by order dated 24.01.2008. It is further claimed that an official chart of his arrears was also prepared placed at Annexure-4. Subsequently, on 18.3.2009 a question was raised with regard to his eligibility for time bound promotion in absence of his - 2 - having cleared the departmental examination. Paragraph-17 of the counter affidavit states that the matter has been forwarded to the Divisional Commissioner on 9.3.2010 for appropriate orders. Let the Divisional Commissioner pass appropriate orders in accordance with the Full Bench judgement of this Court reported in 2000(4) P.L.J.R. 262(Maheshwar Prasad Singh vs. The State of Bihar & ors.) more particularly paragraph-14 of the same quoted hereinafter within a maximum period of 2 months from the date of receipt/presentation of a copy of this order before the respondents. It is expected that the legitimate dues, if any, shall be paid to the petitioner within a period of another two months from the date of such disposal of the matter by the concerned authority. Paragraph-14 of the judgement reads as follows:- “14. The above discussion, however, covers the period between 29.3.82 and 29.4.85. So far as the period between 1.5.80 and 29.3.82 is concerned, I am inclined to agree with the petitioners that after amalgamation of the posts of L.D. and U.D. clerks, in the absence of any provision requiring the clerks to pass Accounts examination for promotion to selection grade, and the erstwhile provision having become redundant or otiose, the promotion could not be denied to them on accountootiose of non- passing of the Accounts examination during that period. The amendment dated 29.3.82 was result of administrative instruction and could not have any retrospective effect. To that extent, I would also endorse the decision of this Court in Shamsuddin’s case.” - 3 - If the petitioner has represented for the grant of any A.C.P. benefits, it is expected that it shall also be considered during the said period of 2 months and appropriate orders vide compliance letter be complied within like manner within two months thereafter. While making such representations it shall be open for the petitioner to raise a claim for payment of statutory interest. The writ application stands disposed. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)