JUDGMENT
R.S. Garg, J.
1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
2. The present writ petition shows a very pathetic condition of the Government and the governance, the absolute usefulness of the Government Officers holding high offices and their counters filed in the Court.
3. The petitioner was appointed on the post of Science Lecturer on 24-7-1973. He along with 133 others was confirmed on 18-9-1981. On 5-5-1985 the petitioner appeared in the departmental examinations but the results were not published due to alleged missing of 300 answer-books. The petitioner was thereafter, given his first time bound promotion on 8-6-1989. On 30th June, 1995 the petitioner and others were posted in the Bihar Education Services Class Ml but were required to draw their salary in their earlier scale and cadre. On 30th March, 1995 a final gradation list was published in which the petitioner was placed at Sl. No. 915. After 1985 no departmental examinations were held for almost about 11 years though the statutes, rules and circulars required the examinations to be held annually.
4. Be that as it may, for the time being, the petitioner could not appear in the said examinations of 1996 because the admit card was issued late and the same reached the office of the petitioner on 12-2-1996 when the date of examinations was already over. On 16-11-1998 on the strength of the examination results 43 persons were promoted and some of them were junior to the petitioner.
5. The petitioner’s grievances are that for none of his fault he has not been promoted, therefore, he be promoted to the post from the date when his juniors had been given promotions.
6. The respondents in their counter are placing very strong reliance on Article 800 of the Bihar Education Code to contend that unless an incumbent passes the departmental examinations he cannot be promoted. True it is that Article 800 of the Code says that unless an officer passes the departmental examinations he would not be promoted but in the opinion of this Court, the said Article would not only govern the Officers but would also bind the State itself. The Education Department cannot act like an illiterate or uneducated person. It is not expected of the Education Department that in oblivion of Article 800 of the Code they would allow the time to pass. If Article 800 of the Code is used as a sheath to defend the action or an order then the petitioner would be entitled to use it as a sword to strike on the illegalities committed by the Department. Article 800 of the Code says that the examination is to be held annually. If the examination is to be held annually then for what reason for long 11 years the examinations were not held is not known to anybody.
7. Should this Court observe that neither there is any Government nor any governance in the State? Should this Court presume that these Articles, Rules and Circulars are issued at the whims and caprice of the Departmental Heads and authorities, just to hang their subordinates and to cut every benefit to which they are entitled? Should this Court say that the Government is acting in a manner which does not benefit a Government in a democratic set up of the society? Should this Court observe that the Departments are acting in a manner which does not befit the Government Departments? Should this Court say that only those persons are promoted, who are the blue eyed babies of the Officers and the politicians? Should this Court feel that the State Government is failing in every filed of its duties and is not in a position to provide the smallest respite to a Government servant to which otherwise he is entitled under the Code, Circulars and Rules of the State Government?
8. It is most unfortunate that Article 800 of the Code is thrown on the face of an employee to say that unless he passes the examination he would not be promoted but at the same time just like a rustic, illiterate and uneducated person, the State Government and the Department of Education forget to read that departmental examinations are to be conducted every year.
9. Nobody is ready to come out of its slumber or to awake from its hibernation. The State Government is obliged to inform this Court that what persuaded it not to hold the examinations for almost 11 years in the present case. The Rules are not framed to be published or printed in the books. The Rules are also not framed to be used as a hangman’s rope to deny the benefit to the Government servants. The Rules are framed to run the Government properly and for proper governance and provide equality in all circumstances. If the Government cannot conduct the examinations for 11 years then it must look into its work in retrospect and should find that some foul flies somewhere which is creating all these problems. The long procession on the road of ‘Jindabad-Murdabad’ in favour of one or the other is not running the Government. The Government should be run in accordance with the mandate of the Constitution. The long procession or ‘Jindabad-Murdabad’ may show that a particular party or a particular leader is approved and appreciated by the public but that would be good for the purposes of the elections and not for running the Government. It is most unfortunate that this Court is required to use this harsh and hard language in this order but I have no other alternative but for saying so.
10. The State itself may feel that it is not bound by its Rules but this Court must say and inform the Government that the Rules framed by the State Government are binding on it. It cannot observe the Rules in its breach. If the Rules are for running the Government and for good governance then the State is also obliged to observe the rules.
11. The petitioner now has passed the examinations and to substantiate that fact he has produced before the Court a communication dated 15-10-1999 issued by the Secretary of Ministerial Examination Committee, Bihar. His grievance still is that almost four years have passed but promotional benefits have not been issued. Let the Departmental Head look into the matter and issue necessary orders in the matter. The petitioner may file an application along with a copy of the said letter and a copy of this order before the Departmental Head, who would be obliged to pass necessary orders in the matter within 15 days of the receipt of the application.
12. The Secretary, Ministerial Examination Committee, Bihar is forewarned that if he does not pass necessary orders on the said application and into the entitlement of the petitioner then that would be deemed to be disobedience of the judicial authority of this Court and breach of this order and the said officer may be held liable under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act and on a complaint he may be awarded full term punishment as provided under the Act
13. The petition is allowed.