Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J. - (1.) The petitioner in this writ petition has prayed for a direction upon the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Assistant Driller from the date his juniors have been promoted along with all consequential benefits pertaining thereto. The petitioner was appointed on the post of Drilling Khalashi on 22.12.1972 in the office of Executive Engineer, Quality Control & Investigation Division, Gumla. By virtue of office order No. 165 as contained in Memo No. 696 dated 5.4.1986 issued under the signature of the Chief Engineer, services of the petitioner were regularized w.e.f. 1.4.1977. Since the petitioner was not given the consequential benefits w.e.f. the date his services as a Drilling Khalashi was regularized, he moved the Hon'ble Patna High Court in C.W.J.C. No. 2088 of 1998 (R) which was disposed of on 1.11.1999 with a liberty to the petitioner to file a representation which was dealt with by the authorities in accordance with law. The petitioner has claimed his promotion to the post of Assistant Driller in view of the fact that one Prayag Narain Singh who was appointed on 15.7.1974 as Drilling Khalashi was promoted on the post of Assistant Driller by office order No. 111 dated 12.3.1986, while ignoring the claim of the petitioner and hence this writ petition.
(2.) Mr. Nand Kishore Prasad Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that although the petitioner was initially appointed prior to Prayag Narain Singh, but even then he, who is junior to the petitioner, has been given promotion to the post of Assistant Driller in spite of the fact that several recommendations were made by the competent authority for considering the case of the petitioner to the said post. It has been submitted that the petitioner has since superannuated from service. Learned counsel for the petitioner further adds that the present case is a glaring example to suggest that how step -motherly treatment has been meted out to the petitioner by not giving him promotion to the post of Assistant Driller from the date his juniors were promoted.
(3.) Mr. Kaustav Panda, learned J.C. to G.A., on the other hand, has submitted that the services of the petitioner in the post of Drilling Khalashi was regularized in the year 1977 and although the petitioner's claim was recommended by the competent authority for considering his case for promotion, but most of such recommendations were of the year 1988 and 1991 and the petitioner has moved this Court after a considerable delay without there being any reasonable explanation with respect to such delay.;