IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9258 of 2002 1. Most. Krishna Devi W/O Late Ram Niwas Singh 2. Sanjeev Kumar Singh S/O Late Ram Niwas Singh 3. Pankaj Kumar S/O Late Ram Niwas Singh 4. Sudhin Kumar S/O Late Ram Niwas Singh 5. Suman Kumar S/O Late Ram Niwas Singh 6. Santosh Kumar Singh S/O Late Ram Niwas Singh All residents of village – Saraiya, P.O. – Saraiya, District-Muzaffarpur. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Commissioner-cum- Secretary, Water Resources (Irrigation)Department. 2. The Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Water Resources (Irrigation) Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Under Secretary, Water Resources (Irrigation) Department, Bihar, Patna. 4. The Chief Engineer, Water Resources (Irrigation) Department, Muzaffarpur. 5. The Chief Engineer, Water Resources (Irrigation) Department, Aurangabad. 6. The Executive Engineer, North Koel Canal Division, Gaya. ----------- 4. 17.02.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The original petitioner has been deceased during the pendency of the writ petition on 13.9.2005 and was substituted by his legal heirs on 12.2.2009. The issue now for consideration is of the financial implication for the family of the deceased on the impugned order. The impugned order dated 27.3.1998 at Annexure- 12 holds that the appointment and promotion of the deceased petitioner on the post of Correspondence Clerk on 12.3.1982 was irregular. That he had not passed the Accounts examination and, therefore, the first time bound promotion given to him with effect from 1.4.1981 was contrary to law. Both the orders were cancelled 2 with directions to recover all payments made in pursuance of the same to the petitioner. The petitioner was appointed in work charge establishment as a Gauge Reader on 1.7.1970. On 19.2.1981 the Respondents constituted a selection committee for considering work charge employees for absorption on the sanctioned vacant posts of Correspondence Clerks. On the recommendation of the Selection Committee, the petitioner was so absorbed as Correspondence Clerk on 6.3.1982 when he joined as such on 12.3.1982. The impugned order was passed 16 years later seeking to revert him to the status of work charge. Similar matter came up for consideration before this Court in CWJC No. 3706 of 1997 in context of a work charge khalasi, promoted to the Correspondence Clerk in the same department and sought to be reverted in the like manner after 16 years. A Bench of this Court by a judgment and order dated 5.1.1998 held relying upon another Bench decision as also a Full Bench decision referred to in paragraph 10& 11 of the judgment that there had to be finality to the action of the Government and they cannot be permitted to reopen such matters after long delay of 16 years. Additionally, it was also noticed that there was quota of 25% for filling up Class III post from eligible candidate of Class IV and that there was nothing to demonstrate that Class IV candidate could not be promoted/appointed against class III Post in the regular 3 establishment, if he was qualified and was so granted benefit in pursuance of the recommendation of the selection committee. This judgment came to be affirmed on challenge by the State in L.P.A. No.330 of 1998 dated 14.10.1998. That closes the issue of allegations of irregularity in the promotion/appointment of the petitioner as Correspondence Clerk from the work charge establishment. On the next issue of grant of first time bound promotion without clearing the departmental examination, learned counsel rightly refers to the Government instruction dated 12.8.1992 at Annexure-9/1 to submit that such restriction was not applicable for persons appointed prior to 1.9.1983. The petitioner was initially appointed on 1.10.1970. In any event, it was apparent from Annexure-11/1 dated 15.2.1997 that the name of the erstwhile deceased petitioner figures at serial 73 of those who have cleared all papers of the Accounts examination in July, 1996. Looking at either aspect of the matter, the second ground urged to deny the benefit of the first time bound promotion to the petitioner is not sustainable in law. In the result, the impugned order dated 27.3.1998 becomes unsustainable. It is, accordingly, quashed. All orders in consequences of the same automatically stands quashed. In view of the conclusion of this Court upholding the absorption of the erstwhile deceased petitioner on the post of Correspondence Clerk and that the order withdrawing his time 4 bound promotion was not sustainable, the legal heirs shall be entitled to all arrears of salary reconsideration and fixation of the retiral benefits of the deceased, if due, and fixation of the family pension accordingly. The petitioner shall be at liberty to also represent for the arrears of salary and other service dues, which may have been denied to the deceased by virtue of the impugned order and which shall have to be now considered in light of the decision of this Court holding the impugned order to be unsustainable. Let such consideration of the arrears of salary, other service dues and fixation of retiral dues and family pension be done within a maximum period of four months from the date of receipt and/or production of a copy of this order and legitimate monetary dues thereupon be paid to the legal heirs within a maxim period of three months thereafter. The writ application stands allowed. AKS/ (Navin Sinha, J.)