IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16962 of 2009 1. PHEKAN DASS S/O LATE NANHAKU DASS R/O MOH- BAHADURPUR SHISH MAHAL APARTMENT, P.S. BAHADURPUR, DISTT. PATNA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY WATER RESOURCES DEPTT., GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DEPUTY SECRETARY WATER RESOURCES DEPTT., GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE BIHAR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN BAILEY ROAD, PATNA 5. THE CHAIRMAN BIHAR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATNA 6. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL BIHAR, PATNA ----------- 2. 29.1.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, for the State, for the Accountant General and for the Bihar Public Service Commission. It is the specific case of the petitioner that he was substantively promoted to the rank of Superintending Engineer and was eligible to be considered for promotion to the post of Chief Engineer. In fact, he was given the current charge on the post of Chief Engineer in the year, 2004 and retired in that capacity on 29.2.2008, while drawing the salary of a Superintending Engineer. It is his further case that his case was put up for consideration before the Departmental Promotion Committee but could not be considered on account of its being deferred itself from time to time. Ultimately, by the time that the BPSC considered his case, the petitioner had superannuated and his claim allegedly was rejected on the ground that in view of his superannuation there was no need to consider his claim. There is no statement in the writ application that the 2 petitioner had approached the authorities by even filing a representation before them prior to coming to this Court. If a Government servant is eligible to be considered for promotion, he cannot be visited with adverse consequences for the laches of the respondents in non-consideration of the candidate in time. Though promotion is not a fundamental right, the right to be considered for promotion is a fundamental right and such consideration necessarily entails a timely consideration under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. Any laches on part of the respondents cannot prejudice consideration of the eligible. If the petitioner submits a representation before respondent no. 2, he is directed to consider and dispose off the same within a maximum period of four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. If the respondents propose to pass an order adverse to the petitioner, they shall be required to pass a reasoned and speaking order, dealing with all issues of facts displaying full application of mind so that judicial review of the order, if necessitated may be facilitated. It shall also be open for the petitioner to file a representation and raise claims for any arrears of salary on the post of Executive Engineer/Superintending Engineer. The application stands disposed. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)