IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2595 of 2007 BASUDEO SINGH -Versus- THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 7/ 25.09,2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the Rohtas Zila Parishad and for the State. The petitioner, who has superannuated from the services of Zila Parishad, Rohtas on 31.01.1994 is before this Court for grant of his first and second time bound promotion with effect from 01.04.1981 and 22.09.1993. A separate counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Zila Parishad and the Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar. From the counter affidavit of the respondents, it is abundantly clear that in pursuance of certain orders of this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 3514 of 1986, the benefit of the 4th Pay Revision was directed to be made available to the employees of the Zila Parishad and which was notified in the Bihar Gazette on 15.09.1993. Once the applicability of the 4th Pay Revision to the employees of the Zila Parishad was determined, the necessary consequence of the same was both, the enhancement of the pay scale and also the grant of first and second time bound 2 promotions, which was an integral part of the 4th Pay Revision Commission Recommendation. There could not have been a truncated interpretation of the same so as to grant the revised pay scale, but not the benefit of time bound promotions. The Gazette notification dated 15.09.1993 could not and does not make out any such distinction. This Court finds it peculiar that in respect of an employee, who retired in 1994, the State Government in the year 2008 raised issues on the question of sanction of the post which the petitioner held and then seeking to cast the burden on the Zila Parishad to show that he does not appear to be interested in making the benefits available to its employees. Thus, the Court, on the facts of the case, is satisfied that the State Government has been raising frivolous objections. Once the Government decided by the Gazette Notification to give the benefit of the 4th Pay Revision Commission to the petitioner by enhancement of pay scales, the eligibility to be considered for grant of first and second time bound promotion followed automatically with the same. If that be so, the respondents have obviously indulged in frivolous time wasting exercise to deny the relief to the petitioner. It is nobody’s case that the petitioner has not been given the revised pay scale as per 3 the 4th Pay Revision Commission Recommendation. This Court is left with no other option but to issue directions of a nature that the authority should have done but has failed to do for grant of first and second time bound promotions. It has accordingly so orders. The respondents are directed to make available the monetary benefits of the first and second time bound promotions to the petitioner positively within a maximum period of four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The application is allowed. S.B.P. (Navin Sinha, J.)