- (1.) Heard the parties.
(2.) Mr. Rajesh Lala, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, submitted that the only claim of the petitioner which now survives in this writ petition is that he should be given the difference/arrears of salary from 1.5.1993 between the post of Associate Professor and Professor. He relied on the judgment of Dr. Paras Nath Prasad v. The State of Bihar and Ors., 1990 2 PLJR 248; Ranjit Sahay Jamuar and Anr. v. State of Bihar and Ors., 1999 1 PLJR 272 and Sita Ram Prasad Srivastava v. State of Bihar and Ors.,2002 2 BLJ 790.
(3.) Mr. P.A.S. Pati, appearing for the State, on the other hand, submitted that the monetary benefits with retrospective promotion cannot be granted in all cases as a thumb rule rather various factors are to be considered if such claim is raised. He relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Kerala and Ors. v. E.K. Bhaskaran Pillai, 2007 6 SCC 524.;