SHRI KRISHNA SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and State.

(2.) The petitioner has moved this Court for the following reliefs :-

(3.) The petitioner is aggrieved by non-grant of ACP which has been denied on the ground that he has not cleared the Departmental Examination. With regard to non-consideration of his total working days as 1719 as a seasonal employee, the authorities have restricted it to only 431 days on the ground that no records are available in the Department. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that with regard to ACP, the stand of the respondents is totally erroneous. It was submitted that passing of Departmental Examination is required as per the conditions of promotion only where the promotional post is existing. It was submitted that ACP Rules only talk about the person being otherwise eligible for regular promotion and also fulfilling the conditions of passing the Departmental Examination, if such condition exists for granting of promotion. Learned counsel submitted that in the present case, the petitioner was appointed as Seasonal Clerk and there is no promotional avenue available from that post. It was submitted that once there is no promotional post available, there cannot be any condition of any requirement or eligibility criteria, much less, any requirement for passing any Departmental Examination. Learned counsel submitted that the issue has finally been settled by a Division Bench in the case of Uday Shankar Prasad v. The State of Bihar and others reported as 2017(3) PLJR 824 in which it has been held that if there is a post without any promotional avenue, there cannot be any requirement for passing any Departmental Examination. He further submitted that the petitioner has given sufficient proof of him having worked from 1719 days as a seasonal employee but due to laches of the authorities, who are not looking into their own records, the benefit due to the petitioner is illegally being denied.