IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2308 of 2003 SHEO SHANKAR YADAV, S/o Late Ram Bahadur Yadav, R/o Village- Bhulauni, Post-Semaria, P.S.- Nautan, District- Siwan, Present working as Assistant Teacher in Middle School, Soharai, Anchal-Guthani, District- Siwan. ……….. Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Director, Primary Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The District Education Establishment Committee through its Chairman, District Magistrate, Siwan. 4. The District Magistrate, Siwan. 5. The District Superintendent of Education, Siwan. …….. Respondents. ----------- 3. 26-07-2010 Learned counsel for the petitioner would fairly submit that after the judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Ram Nath Prasad Singh & Others Vs. State of Bihar & Others reported in 2009(3) PLJR 384, an exercise has to be done by the authorities for deciding the claim of promotion of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the State will have no objection to the aforementioned submission. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that if and when the respondents would ultimately decide the claim of the petitioner for grant of promotion in the B.A. Trained Scale of pay, the authorities must also examine as to whether junior to the petitioner was given such promotion. Counsel for the State would intervene stating that there is specific stand taken in the counter affidavit that no junior to the petitioner was ever given B.A. Trained Scale of Pay and the persons claimed to be junior to the petitioner actually are senior to him. 2 In view of the fact that a fresh gradation list had to be drawn in terms of the judgment of the Full Bench in the case of Ram Nath Prasad Singh(Supra) and the case of the teachers in such gradation list has to be considered from the date of their entitlement, this court would like to add, while disposing of this application, that if any junior to the petitioner in the revised gradation list would still be found to be getting B.A. Trained Scale from an earlier date to the one assigned to the petitioner, the respondents will also grant the petitioner promotion from the date of his junior. If however, the respondents would cancel the promotion of any of the alleged junior to the petitioner then they will not be refused to give such promotion to the petitioner. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this writ petition is disposed of. Sujit (Mihir Kumar Jha, J)