Pramath Patnaik, J. - (1.) In the instant writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for direction on the respondents to forthwith regularize his promotion on the post of Excise Inspector with effect from 01.03.1988 and for direction on the respondents to forthwith release the payment of arrears of salary. The petitioner has further prayed for direction on the respondents to fix and finalize his pension on the basis of the enhanced dues along with interest after giving the benefit of Assured Career Progression.
(2.) Controverting the averment made in the writ petition, counter-affidavits have been filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 & 3. In the counter-affidavits, it has been specifically mentioned that the posts of Inspector of Excise in the Department of Excise & Prohibition, Govt. of Bihar are filled up from two sources, i.e. by direct recruitment and by promotion of selected Sub-Inspector of Excise and confirmed Assistants/Head Clerks of the Excise Department. The quota fixed for each of the sources is as follows: (a) 50% for direct recruitment. (b) 50% for promotion. Before re-organization of the State, the name of the petitioner and some others were considered for promotion to the post of Inspector of Excise on substantive basis by the Departmental Promotion Committee in its meeting dated 18.08.1994, but owning to pendency of a departmental proceeding against the petitioner, which was initiated vide letter dated 27.03.1993, the DPC did not recommend his name for such promotion. Again the name of the petitioner for such promotion on substantive basis was considered by the DPC in its meeting held on 07.12.1994 and 06.06.1995, but on account of pendency of the aforesaid departmental proceeding, the DPC did not recommend his name for such promotion. In terms of recommendation of the DPC, some juniors to the petitioner were promoted to the post of Inspector of Excise and one post was kept reserved for the petitioner. It has further been mentioned in the counter- affidavit that in the departmental proceeding, the petitioner has been found guilty and punishment of withholding of two increments with cumulative effect has been imposed against him vide order dated 04.12.1997.
(3.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, State of Jharkhand & Bihar and respondent No. 4 and perused the records. After giving my anxious consideration to the pleadings of the respective parties, I am of the considered view that the grievance of the petitioner does not merit consideration in view of settled proposition of law that promotion is not a matter of right but right to consider for promotion is the legal right of the employee.;