IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14328 of 2008 1. LAXMAN DUBEY, S/o Late Raj Kishore Dubey, resident of village & P.O. Santhi, District – Siwan. 2. Balindra Singh, S/o K. Singh, at present working as Headmaster, M.S. Sohari, Anchal Guithani, District – Siwan. …. Petitioners. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. The District Superintendent of Education, Siwan. …. Respondents. For the Petitioners : - Sri Bipin Bihari Singh, Advocate Sri S.K. Ranjan, Advocate For the State : - Sri Ram Das Singh, A.C. to G.P. 14. ----------- 03/ 12.11.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioners and counsel appearing for the State. Petitioners have prayed for issuance of a direction to the concerned respondent to allow them consequential benefits with retrospective effect, i.e. the date with effect from which they have been allowed promotion. In case of the petitioners they were promoted with retrospective effect but the consequential monetary benefits have been allowed to them from the date of the issuance of the order, whereby promotion has been allowed to them with retrospective effect. Petitioners were appointed as Assistant Teachers and on account of their seniority and the educational qualification they were found eligible for promotion in the graduate trained scale, in view of the concurred promotional rules, some of the teachers, were entitled for such promotions, but not being granted promotion in the graduate trained science scale, - 2 - approached the Hon’ble High Court and in terms of the direction of the High Court as well as the promotional rules, petitioners’ case were also considered for grant of graduate trained scale. Promotion was allowed to them vide Memo No. 289 dated 27.9.1995 with effect from 1.4.1982 and 1.4.1983, as the petitioners had eligibility for promotion in the trained science graduate scale since 1.4.1982 and 1.4.1983 respectively. But as mentioned in the order, till the date of the issuance of the promotional order, it was only notional. Petitioners’ were allowed consequential benefits including the monetary benefits of the promotional scale was with effect from 27.9.1995 i.e. the date of the issuance of the letter. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the claim of the petitioners for consequential benefits of the promotional benefit with effect from 1.4.1982 and 1.4.1983 was not being considered by the Respondent authority, as such they have approached this Court. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of District Superintendent of Education, Siwan. In para 6 of the counter affidavit reason for not allowing the consequential benefits to the petitioners in promotional scale, with effect from the date of - 3 - promotion, has been mentioned. It is stated that, as directed by the Finance Department, in it’s Memo No. 2074 dated 4.4.1985, monetary benefits cannot be allowed with retrospective effect, but only from the date the employee is promoted on the post, and assumes the promotional post. Counsel for the petitioners in reply to it has placed reliance on a decision of this Court reported in 2005(10 PJLR 297. In this case also in the similar circumstance, the writ petitioner had approached this Court. In that writ application also the State Government had placed reliance on same letter of the Finance Department, as well as Provisions under Rule 74 of the Bihar Financial Rules and Rule 58 of the Bihar Service Code. Considering the stand taken by the State it was held by this Court that in a normal circumstances the benefit of promotion to the public servant is to be given with effect from the date on which such public servant joins his promotional post. This does not create any problem but the problem arises in the cases in which a government servant is deprived from discharging duties of the higher grade of the post, for no fault on his part, and the order of promotion though made effective from retrospective effect, but consequential benefit is not allowed. In such cases Finance - 4 - Department’s letter dated 4.4.1985, Rule 58 of the Bihar Service Code and Rule 74 of the Bihar Financial Rules, will not come to the way of the employee in receiving the consequential monetary benefit with retrospective effect. This is, such a circumstance, in which the government employee has been deprived from discharging duties of the higher grade of the post, for no fault on his part. In the present case also petitioners became entitled for being promoted with effect from 1.4.1982 and 1.4.1983, but for several years authorities did not consider their cases for promotion. Finally the promotional order was issued in the year, 1995. All these years for which the petitioners remained deprived of being promoted, and for which they were not responsible, they should not be allowed to suffer the loss. The respondents are directed to allow the petitioners consequential monetary benefits attached to the promotional posts with effect from the date they have been given promotion i.e. 1.4.1982 and 1.4.1983 respectively, instead of the date of issuance of order. This application is allowed. DKS/ (Mridula Mishra, J.)