MD ABDUL BASHAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two writ petitions are being taken up together at the request of the learned counsel for the petitioners as the facts are virtually the same and are being disposed of together instead of dealing with them separately, in view of the submissions made, the facts, as emanating in the first case, would decide the result of both the cases as petitioners submit.

(2.) THE petitioner of the first case, who superannuated on 31.08.1984, was an employee of the Department of Agriculture, Government of Bihar. He has filed this writ petition for a direction to the respondent-State to grant him the second time bound promotion as also to grant him super time scale. A counter affidavit is on record.

(3.) HAVING considered the matter, in my view, both the prayers are misconceived. From the events, as noted above, it would be apparent that petitioner had received four substantive promotions in his service career. Time bound promotion, as envisaged by Government Resolution No 10770 dated 30.12.1981, while accepting the recommendation of the 04th Pay Revision Committee, was as an anti stagnation policy where an employee, though competent to be promoted, could not be promoted because of inadequacy of post at the promotional level. It was provided that if an employee did not get any promotion within the first 10 years of his service, he would be entitled to a time bound promotion being promotion to the next pay scale. If in next 15 years, he did not receive any further promotion, he would get a second time bound promotion to the next higher pay scale.