Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Patna High Court - Orders

Parmeshwar Pandit & Ors vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 17 August, 2010

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                          CWJC No.2351 of 2010
1. PARMESHWAR PANDIT S/O LATE BUDHAI PANDIT R/O VILL.- SHERPUR,
P.S.- MANER, DISTT.- PATNA
2. BAIDYANATH SINGH S/O LATE AMIR SINGH R/O VILL.- SAHPUR, P.S.
MAHNAR, DISTT.- VAISHALI
3. RAM SEVAK SAHNI S/O LATE BACHCHU SAHNI R/O VILL. AND P.S.
BOCHAHA, DISTT.- MUZAFFARPUR
4. SURESH PRASAD SINHA S/O LATE TRIBHUWAN PRASAD R/O MOHALLA-
KAZIPUR, ROAD NO.3, P.S. KADAM KUAN, DISTT.- PATNA
                      Versus
1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE SECRETARY ANIMAL HUSBANDRY
AND    FISHERIES     DEPARTMENT,    GOVERNMENT     OF BIHAR, NEW
SECRETARIAT, PATNA
2. THE DIRECTOR, ANIMAL HUSBANDRY DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF
BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA
3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR (HEADQUARTER), ANIMAL HUSBANDRY
DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA
                                 -----------
02.   17.08.2010

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioners question the order dated 29.11.2006 which denies them the monetary benefits of a retrospective promotion and grants it notionally only. Strong reliance is placed on a judgment of this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 12858 of 2002 disposed on 25.3.2003, which in turn relies upon a Division Bench orders in Letters Patent Appeal No. 552 of 1996 to urge that delay in consideration for promotion and issuance of consequential orders for promotion being attributable to the respondents themselves, they cannot be allowed to take advantage of their own lapses in denying promotion to the petitioner in due time.

The respondents having delayed consideration for promotion, the petitioner approached 2 this Court earlier in C.W.J.C. No. 2716 of 2006, and only whereafter the orders for promotion have been passed. This Court in consonance with the earlier orders of this Court relied upon holds that the petitioners are entitled to full consequential monetary benefits with retrospective effect in pursuance of the promotion granted to them.

The order dated 29.11.2006 is therefore set aside to the extent that he denies them retrospective monetary benefits.

The respondents are required to pay the monetary benefits to the petitioners within a maximum period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, failing which the petitioners shall be at liberty to raise any claim for interest as a part of the present order, and if they are compelled to approach this Court in contempt jurisdiction for enforcement of the same.

In the event of grant of any interest in the contempt jurisdiction, the liability for the interest shall be borne by the State Government for compliance, but shall have to recover from the salary of the delinquent official concerned after fixation of responsibility.

The writ application stands allowed.

P.K.                                  (Navin Sinha, J.)