IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10521 of 2006 Surendra Kumar Sinha, Son of late Biswanath Sahay, Resident of Fakir Toli, Chhoti Bazar, Moghalpura, P.S. Khajkalan, Patna City, District Patna. ---------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar through its Chief Secretary. 2. The Secretary, Department of Health, Medical Education and Family Welfare, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat Building, Patna. 3. The Director in Chief, Health Service, Government of Bihar, Department of Health, Medical Education and Family Welfare, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. The Principal, Nalanda Medical College, Patna. 5. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna. ---------- Respondents ----------- 2 26.08.2010 Having heard Mr. Chakradhari Saran Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State as also counsel for the Accountant General in respect of the following prayer of the petitioner:- “1. That this application is directed for issuance of a writ in the nature of writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ/order/ direction commanding the Respondents to consider to Senior Selection grade with effect from 1.4.1986 and Super Time Selection Grade with effect from 1.4.1989 treating him at least at part with the person junior to him who has been given this benefit recently vide Memo No. 397(4) dated 8.3.2006, issued by the Directorate of Health Services, Bihar, Patna and to grant both 1st and 2nd 2 Assured Career Progression w.e.f. 1.8.99. This application is also for a direction to extend to the Petitioner all benefits consequential to grant of Senior Selection Grade and Super Time Selection Grade as indicated above, in terms of difference of salary/allowances, revised pension/gratuity, leave encashment and revised commuted value of Pension etc.” this Court would find that ordinarily the petitioner had already called it a day but then the respondents themselves gave a cause of action to the petitioner by promoting an alleged junior, namely, Rajendra Prasad Sinha, a retired Lab Technician. The grievance of the petitioner, therefore, is that when a junior person was given all such promotion, may be on account of an order passed by this Court, the petitioner would also be entitled for grant of such promotion. In absence of a counter affidavit, this Court would not like to make any final pronouncement on such submission of the counsel for the petitioner but, then considering the fact that the cause of action to the petitioner can also said to have arisen 3 on 8.3.2006, the respondents were duty bound to consider the representation of the petitioner filed by him on 19.7.2006 (Annexure-5). That being so, this Court would direct the respondents to consider such representation of the petitioner dated 19.7.2006 (Annexure-5) and pass a reasoned order. In the event, the petitioner would be also found entitled for grant of such promotion as claimed in this writ application, he will also be given the same monetary benefit as was given to the alleged counterpart, namely, Rajendra Prasad Sinha. In the event, for any reason, the respondents would reject such claim of the petitioner, they would be under obligation to pass a reasoned order and communicate the same to the petitioner by registered post with acknowledgement due within the same period of six months. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this application is disposed of. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)