IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.559 of 2003 DR.NARENDRA PRASAD SAHA, son of late Dr. Shayam Sundar Saha, resident of Anandgarh Colony, P.S. Barari, District Bhagalpur … Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Secretary cum Commissioner, Department of Health, Govt. of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna- 800001 3. The Additional Commissioner, Department of Health, Govt. of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna 800001 4. The Deputy Secretary, Department of Health, Govt. of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna 800001 … Respondents. ----------- 3. 2.7.2010 Heard Mr. Bimlendu Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the State. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows: “a. Issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus or an appropriate order or direction commanding the respondent authorities to grant promotion to the petitioner in the senior selection grade scale (12 & ½%) with effect from 15.6.1974 as per decision contained in Memo No. 923(4) dated 4.5.2000 (Annexure 5) and consequently pay the difference of arrear salary with effect from 1.4.1978 and other consequential pensionary benefits on account of aforesaid promotion with effect from 15.6.1974 over and above the payment already made to the petitioner. 2 b. Issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus or an appropriate order or direction commanding the respondent authorities to grant promotion to the petitioner in the Super time scale (2 & ½%) with effect from the date admissible to him in view of the said decision dated 4.5.2000 (Annexure 5) and consequently pay the difference of arrear salary after fixation of the same as per extent rules and further pay other consequential pensionary benefits on account of the said promotion over and above the payments already made to the petitioner. c. Issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus or an appropriate order or direction commanding the respondent authorities to grant the petitioner the unpaid arrear salary for the period of October, 1990 to December, 1990 which was not paid to him due to his suspension for the said period even after the same was revoked in December, 1990 itself.” From the counter affidavit it becomes clear that the petitioner was subjected to a departmental proceeding wherein the charges against him were partially found to be proved. It has also 3 surfaced that the petitioner was made accused in a criminal case arising out of M.S.D. Scam. These facts mentioned in the counter affidavit have not been controvered by filing any rejoinder to the same. In that view of the matter, this Court would not find any error in the decision of the Government in denying such promotion to the petitioner which cannot be claimed as a matter of right. The petitioner’s service record being chequered he cannot claim promotion in senior selection grade with retrospective effect. The petitioner in fact has also already retired from service on 31.12.1990 and therefore, his claim from retrospective promotion as claimed in this writ petition is wholly untenable. Thus, for the reasons recorded above, this Court would not find any merit in this application and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/