IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6130 of 2002 DEO NANDAN PRASAD Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr Pushkar Narayan Shahi and Ravi Kumar Advocates For the State : Mr Vipin Kumar, JC to AG For Respondent no. 5: Mr Amrendra Nath Tiwary, Advocate ------- 13. 20.01.2009 Heard leaned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State as also the learned Counsel for the private respondent no. 5. The prayer in this writ application is for an appropriate direction to the respondent State for considering the case of the petitioner for promotion substantially to the post of Head Clerk from the post of Clerk in accordance with the seniority list dated 1.6.1988 at Annexure 1. The petitioner is stated tobe at serial no. 205 while respondent no. 5 is at serial no. 327. Learned counsels for the State and the private respondents have no objection to the disposal of the writ application with appropriate directions to the State authorities to consider the cases for promotion from the post of Clerk to Head Clerk in accordance with the vacancy as per the seniority list dated 1.6.1988. The original bone of contention between the petitioner and respondent no. 5 appeared to be a fight for the post of Incharge Head Clerk with the petitioner being aggrieved and the respondents claiming that respondent no. 5 had been granted senior selection grade and therefore given Incharge control of Head Clerk. That controversy appears to have become irrelevant. Learned Counsel for respondent no. 5 refers to paragraph 5 of his counter affidavit filed today to submit that the Incharge control of the post of Head Clerk given to respondent no. 5 has ended and he also substantively holds the post of Clerk today like the petitioner. The writ application is therefore disposed with a direction for consideration of promotion to the post of Head Clerk in accordance with the seniority list dated 1.6.1988 within a maximum period of six months from the date of receipt and/or production of a copy of this order. The Court considers it necessary also to observe that any Incharge arrangement on the post of Head Clerk can only be strictly in accordance with the seniority list and any Incharge arrangement whether in the past or prevalent cannot be beyond a maximum period of six months from the date of assumption of such charge on ad hoc basis and shall automatically cease to have effect on expiry of six months with all consequences attending to respondents. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)