IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CWJC No.4025 of 2006
BHOLA PRASAD SON OF LATE MANGARU RAM
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NAVARATANPUR, P.S.
DANAPUR, PATNA.
Versus
1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH TH SECRETARY,
COOPERATIVE DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR,
PATNA.
2. THE REGISTRAR COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES, GOVT.
OF BIHAR, PATNA.
3. THE REGIONAL JOINT REGISTRAR, COOPERATIVE
SOCIETIES, BHAGALPUR.
4. THE DEPUTY CHIEF AUDITOR, BIHAR STATE
HOUSING COOPERATIVE FEDERATION, LALIT
BHAWAN, PATNA.
5. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, BIHAR, PATNA.
-----------
2 29/10/2010 Certain claim of the petitioner with regard to
second time bound promotion and second A.C.P. has
been rejected vide annexure-12. This is the speaking
order which has been passed on 2.6.2005 after
considering the service record of the petitioner and
taking into consideration the earlier direction of the High
Court contained in annexure-6.
It is evident from a reading of annexure-6
coupled with annexure-12 that the petitioner was re-
appointed in service in the year 1981 and the High Court
in its earlier order clearly directed that for the purposes
of pension the entire period of service would be taken
-2-
into consideration but whether such a relief will also
apply to time bound promotion is another issue.
Obviously the benefit of promotion and other benefits
will have to be calculated from the date the petitioner
was re-appointed and the High Court directed benefit to
the petitioner to a limited extent in the sense that for
calculation of pension of the petitioner, entire length of
service from the date of initial appointment was to be
considered but the same cannot be extended even to
cases of promotion as there is no dispute that the
petitioner came to be re-appointed and a fact which was
never challenged otherwise.
Reasoning given for rejection of the second time
bound promotion and the benefit of second A.C.P. to the
petitioner seems to be cogent and correct.
This writ application has no merit. It is
dismissed.
AMIN/ (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)