SIDHNATH PRASAD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition, the petitioner is aggrieved by Order No. 142/2000 -2001, communicated vide Memo No. 10 dated 5.1.2001 (Annexure 2) and the order, contained in Letter No. 507 dated 14th July, 2004, which is Annexure 6, and the validity of which has been challenged in I.A. No. 4052. of 2004. By the said two orders, the claim of the petitioner with respect to time bound promotions have been rejected.

(2.) IT appears that earlier also the petitioner filed C.W.J.C. No. 6421. of 2000 claiming time bound promotions pursuant to the Government decision dated 19.9.2000, which was disposed of vide order dated 25.7.2000 (Annexure 1) remitting the matter to the respondents with a direction to consider his case for time bound promotion (first and second), if otherwise eligible for the same. Thereafter his claim was considered and rejected vide aforementioned order, contained in Annexure 2. The petitioner filed M.J.C. No. 606 of 2001 for initiating contempt on the ground that the order rejecting the petitioners claim was issued beyond the time specified by this Court and, further, that the order was bad and illegal. The said M.J.C. petition was dismissed vide order dated 14.1.2004 (Annexure 3) with an observation that in case the petitioner is left with any grievance, he may seek his remedies in accordance with law. Thereafter the petitioner approached the Collector, vide Annexure 4, with his aforementioned grievance, which has been rejected vide Annexure 6.

(3.) IN short, the relevant facts are that the petitioner was initially appointed in the year 1949 and finally superannuated on 31.5.1988. Meanwhile, the provision relating to grant of two time bound promotions came in December, 1981; one after completion of ten years of service or with effect from 1.4.1981, whichever is earlier, and second after completion of 25 years of service, subject to fulfilment of other conditions required for grant of regular promotion.