IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10970 of 2002 LAXMAN PRASAD SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 3/ 28/2/2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The relief sought in the writ application is for promotion to the rank of Sub-inspector of Police, Bihar with effect from 1994 when his juniors are stated to have been promoted as such. The petitioner was promoted to the post of Assistant Sub-inspector of Police on 11.6.1980 and was confirmed on the same with effect from 1.3.1981. It is his case that he was eligible to be considered and promoted by the Central Recruitment Board held in the year 1994 for promotion to the post of Sub-inspector of Police. That such promotion was denied when his juniors were promoted. In paragraph- 14 of the writ application he states that there is no adverse remarks in his service book. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents. The stand of the respondents is that in 1994 the petitioner had 8 rewards and 15 minor punishments and 2 major punishments. He was, therefore, awarded more punishments than rewards 2 and, therefore, in terms of the police order No.114 was not found fit for promotion to the rank of Sub-inspector of Police. There was also a departmental proceeding No.55/94 pending against him and for which reason he could not be considered in 1995. That his case was thereafter considered ,but for lack of availability of the service book or the A.C.R. at one time or the other, his case could not be considered for promotion. No rejoinder to the counter affidavit has been filed. Quite obviously, the stand of the petitioner in paragraph-14 of the counter affidavit that he had impeccable service record, is not borne out from the counter affidavit. The petitioner is not in a position to tell this Court as to what ultimately happened to him in the departmental proceeding. If he was exonerated, the situation may be very different from that if he was punished with regard to the date of consideration for his promotion vis-à-vis 1995. Insofar as the period thereafter is concerned, according to the counter affidavit of the respondents themselves, the petitioner is not at fault and his case was required to be considered. This writ application is, therefore, disposed with the observation that the respondents shall consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the rank of Sub-inspector of Police firstly on the basis of 3 the result of the departmental proceeding No.55/94 and thereafter in accordance with law. Let such consideration be done within a maximum period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)