- (1.) HEARD Mr. Saurav Arun, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned J.C. to S.C. (L&C) for the Respondent -State.
(2.) PETITIONERS in this writ application have prayed for a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for their promotions to the post of the Sub -Inspector of Excise after giving them the benefit of relaxation in the upper age limit in the light of the judgment passed by this Court in W.P. (S) No. 6346 of 2007 and on the basis of the ratio laid down by this Court in W.P. (S) No. 2628 of 2005. The case of the petitioners is that they were appointed as Excise Clerks in the Excise Department under the Respondents on 27.07.1990 and 30.05.1998 respectively. It is contended on behalf of the petitioners that the Appointment Rules stipulate that for appointment on the post of Sub -Inspector of Excise, 75 per cent of vacancies have to be filled up by direct recruitment and 25 per cent by promotion and in every year, the vacancies should be filled up by following the aforesaid procedure. Originally the upper age limit for direct recruitment was fixed at 25 years and for appointment by way of promotion at 35 years. Subsequently, by a Notification of the State Government, the upper age limit was enhanced from 25 years to 35 years for direct recruits for the General candidates and to 40 years for the Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes candidates. However, the upper age limit for appointment through promotion was not enhanced.
(3.) THE grievance of the petitioners is that consequent upon the reorganization of the State of Bihar and on the creation of the State of Jharkhand, since after the year 2000, no departmental examination was ever conducted for appointment to the post of Sub -Inspectors by way of promotion and it was only after about seven years from the date of creation of the State, that an effort was initiated to fill up the vacancies through promotion in the year 2007. On account of such inaction and the delay caused in conducting the departmental examination on the part of the Respondents -authorities, the petitioners who were eligible by virtue of their age for their appointment by way of promotion to the higher post, were denied the benefit thereof and when now the action has been initiated for filling up the posts, the petitioners have been denied the benefit of promotion on the ground that they are not eligible on account of their having crossed the upper age limit.;