Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.41 seconds)

Umesh Lal vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 6 May, 2011

As far as the third issue is concerned, in the opinion of this Court the 11 notional promotion granted to the petitioner vide Memo No. 203 dated 10.1.2002 w.e.f. 1.2.1996 cannot be granted with a rider that he would not be entitled to the monetary benefits. The reasons given by the State that those persons who have got the monetary benefits had moved this Court, and therefore, they were given the benefits, is not a good enough reason for depriving others from being granted the monetary benefits. It has been held in several decisions including the decisions rendered by the Apex Court in the case of Shiva Narayan Lal Vs. State of Bihar & Ors. [1999 (1)PLJR 243] and in the case of Md. Hafiz Vs. State of Bihar & Ors. [2003 (2) PLJR 44] that the material benefits cannot be withheld to the government servant who has been granted promotion notionally or retrospectively. As such the writ application is allowed in part. The petitioner would be entitled to the monetary benefits to the post of an Assistant Engineer from the year 1996. The retiral dues should be accordingly recalculated on the basis of this order within a period of 12 three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order and the dues should be paid to him within a period of six months thereafter. However, this Court does not accept the contention of the petitioner that he should be granted promotion from 1989, or that he would be entitled to an additional pay under rule 89 and 103 of the Bihar Service Code. Sanjay/A.F.R. ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)
Patna High Court - Orders Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

The State Of Jharkhand Through The ... vs Jai Prakash Singh on 12 January, 2015

To buttress his argument, learned counsel for the respondent-writ petitioner has relied upon the judgment rendered in the case of Shiva Narayan Lal Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors reported in 1999 (1) PLJR 243 and also in the case of Dr. Paras Nath Prasad Vs. The State of Bihar and others reported in 1990 (2) PLJR 248, which are not applicable in the present case.
Jharkhand High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 1 - D N Patel - Full Document

M.M.Sharfuddin vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 2 December, 2010

In support of his submission, he has relied upon a Division Bench Judgment of this Court in the case of Dr.Paras Nath Prasad Vs. State of Bihar [1990(2) PLJR 248] and a learned Single Judge Judgment in the case of Shiv Narain Lal Vs. State of Bihar [1999(1) -3- PLJR 243] Counter affidavits filed by the respondents do not justify grant of promotion to the petitioner notionally. In the counter affidavit, it is stated that the concurrence of the Finance Department has been sought for and action shall be taken after receiving the concurrence. However, there is no statement in the counter affidavit or supplementary counter affidavit as to why this promotion has been granted to the petitioner notionally.
Patna High Court - Orders Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

The State Of Bihar Through The Principal ... vs Dhannoo Lal on 22 February, 2017

State has come forward with a fact that monetary benefit granted to the junior along with promotion is completely illegal, show cause for illegal act has been handed over to the authorities who have been found involved are also facing the departmental proceeding. He has prayed for review of the order but he has not pointed out any Patna High Court C. REV. No.209 of 2015 (9) dt.22-02-2017 2 error apparent on the face of the record. So much so this issue granting monetary benefit from the date of promotion is no longer res integra in view of the several judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as this Court. Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgments of this Court in the case of Shiva Narayan Lal v. State of Bihar and others, reported in 1999(1) PLJR 243 and Md. Hafiz v. State of Bihar and others, reported in 2003(2 PLJR 44. Both the judgments reflect, the person who has not been granted promotion, illegally deprived from promotion is entitled the benefit of promotion, from retrospective effect along with financial benefit.
Patna High Court - Orders Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - S Pandey - Full Document
1