Patna High Court LPA No.1015 of 2005 (5) dt.26-09-2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.1015 of 2005 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2693 of 2004 =================================================== Rama Kant Singh, son of Late Kapildeo Singh, resident of Jawahar Nagar, South of New Bailey Road, P.S.-Danapur, District-Patna .... .... Appellant Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 2. The Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna 3. The Secretary, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Deptt., Govt. of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna 4. The Commissioner and Secretary, Deptt. of Finance, Govt. of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna 5. The Member, Board of Revenue, Govt. of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna 6. The Chairman, Bihar Public Service Commission, Bailey Road, Patna .... .... Respondents =================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant :Mr. Abhay Kumar Singh I, Advocate Mr. Bharat Bhushan, Advocate =================================================== 5 26-09-2011 The present appeal has been filed against the order dated 03.08.2005 passed by learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No.2693 of 2004. The grievance of the petitioner-appellant herein is with regard to non-consideration of his promotion in the grade of Super Time Scale-1 of Bihar Administrative Service with effect from the date when it was due. According to the petitioner-appellant herein, the post was available and he was eligible for the post. A counter affidavit has been field by the respondent before the learned Single judge stating therein that the case of the petitioner-appellant herein was considered on 23.10.2003 and it was rejected on the ground that the petitioner-appellant herein got Patna High Court LPA No.1015 of 2005 (5) dt.26-09-2011 superannuated on 31.01.2003. Accepting the same, the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal has been preferred. It has been contended by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner-appellant herein that the grounds sought for rejection of candidature of the appellant cannot be sustained under law because even though he got superannuated on 31.01.2003 but it became due in the year 1999 itself when number of posts were vacant but he was not promoted, for the reasons best known to the respondent-authorities. We had the occasion to go through the order passed by learned Single Judge. On perusal of the same, we are of the opinion that the grounds taken in the counter affidavit that as the appellant was being superannuated on 31.01.2003, hence, his case was rejected, is not sustainable in the eye of law for the reasons that when the respondent authorities had considered the case of the petitioner-appellant herein for promotion, the vacant posts were available and promotion was due to the appellant. In absence of any other reasons forthcoming from the counter affidavit, we are of the opinion that the matter may be remanded back to the respondent-authorities for reconsideration of the case of the appellant for promotion. Accordingly, we remand the matter back to the respondent-authorities to reconsider the case of the petitioner-appellant herein taking note of availability of posts from the date it has fallen due to the appellant till his date of retirement and if case of the appellant comes within the zone of Patna High Court LPA No.1015 of 2005 (5) dt.26-09-2011 consideration and if he is found eligible for promotion, the promotional benefit shall be extended to him in accordance with law preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. With the above modification, the order of learned Single Judge is set aside and the appeal stands allowed. ASHWINI /- (T. Meena Kumari, J) (Vikash Jain, J)