IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8420 of 2003 DILIP KUMAR SINGH aged about 61 years, son of Late Bindeshwari Prasad Singh, resident of village Sakaldi, Police Station Sakaldi, District Bhojpur at presently residing in Ram Motor Gali, Kashi Bhawan, Maharaja hata, Arrah. Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Agriculture Production Commissioner, having his office in Vikas Bhawan, Police Station Sachivalaya, District patna. 2.The Finance Commissioner, Govrnment of Bihar, having his office in Old Secretariat Compound, Police station Sachivalaya, District Patna. 3.The Under Secretary (Personnel Claim Cell) Finance Department, having his office in pant Bhawan, District Patna. 4.The Director, Agriculture, having his office in Vikas Bhawan, Police Station Sachivalaya, District Patna. ----------- 3 6/1/2010 Heard counsel for the parties. Prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows:- “That this is an application for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for first time bound promotion with effect from 1.4.1981 and second time bound promotion with effect from 1.4.1991 and further directs the respondents to pay him difference of arrears of salary consequent upon the promotion and accordingly pay the consequential retiral benefit to the petitioner.” At the out set even before Mr. Man Mohan learned counsel for the petitioner could begin making his submissions Mr. Pathak, learned counsel appearing on 2 behalf of the State had drawn attention of this Court towards paragraph nos. 4 to 8 of the counter affidavit, according to which grievance of the petitioner is yet to be examined and decided. In those paragraphs of the counter affidavit it has been stated that the requisites papers pertaining to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of first and second time bound promotion are still being traced out/located and they will be placed in the meeting of the departmental promotion committee for taking a decision regarding first and second time bound promotion to the petitioner. This Court would find that the entitlement of first and second time bound promotion to the petitioner on 1.4.1981 and 1.4.1991 respectively have yet not been finally decided till date in 2010 even when he had already retired from service in the year 1998. Truly speaking it is really a shocking state of affairs and the respondents must do something seriously to improve this situation. The very concept of the time bound promotion was to remove stagnation for mitigating hardships of an employee/officer who could not earn regular promotion due to want of vacancy. Such time bound promotion, therefore, has to be given immediately from the due date. One can condone the delay of six months or year in notifying such time bound promotion but when such delay is of more than two 3 decades as in the present case, it has to be held that there is something seriously wrong in the entire manner of functioning and decision making process in the offices of the State Government. Be that as it may, this Court would dispose of this writ application with a firm direction to the respondents to ensure that the claim of time bound promotion of the petitioner as raised in this writ application be finally decided and the amount payable to the petitioner, if any, must be also paid to the petitioner within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. Let it be however made clear that this Court has not gone into merits of claim of the petitioner and the entitlement for his such time bound promotion has to be decided by the competent authority strictly in accordance with law. With the aforementioned observation/direction this application is disposed of. Abhay Kumar (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)