- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties. Writ Petitioner/appellant died during pendency of this appeal and he has been substituted by his legal heirs.
(2.) The employee original writ petitioner retired on 28.02.2017. The writ petitioner was appointed on 15.07.1988 as an Assistant Teacher (Science) in Matric Trained Scale in the Middle School, Rabda Khura, Ranka, District -Palamau and before his retirement on 28.02.2017, approached the Writ Court in W.P. (S) No.5012 of 2016 seeking a direction upon the respondent-State to grant him promotion with effect from 15.07.1996 in Grade-4 instead of 26.02.2007 and in Grade -7, that is said to be the scale of Headmaster of a Middle School, with effect from 15.07.2001 instead of 29.06.2013 in terms of the provisions of the Bihar Taken Over Elementary School Teachers Promotion Rules, 1993.
(3.) The learned Writ Court declined the prayer holding as under :- "4. The Bihar Taken Over Elementary School Teachers Promotion Rules, 1993 regulates the process of promotion of the teachers working in the primary schools. Under Rule 7, a seniority list is prepared each year and objections are invited. Only after the gradation list is approved, promotions are granted. The petitioner has not pleaded whether against the gradation list he raised any objection in time. The only plea raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the respondents did not prepare the gradation list as mandated under Rule7 and therefore, the petitioner cannot be penalized on account of default of the respondents. To this contention, only thing which needs to be noticed is that the petitioner never approached this Court with a grievance that mandate under 1993 Promotion Rules are not followed by the respondents. The learned State counsel has rightly contended that the petitioner has only a right for consideration for promotion. Availability of vacancies cannot be a ground for shifting the date of promotion in Grade 4 from 26.02.2007 to 15.07.1996 and in Grade7 from 29.06.2013 to 15.07.2001. The petitioner has not explained the delay in not preferring an objection, and approaching this Court more than 10 years after he was granted promotion in Grade 4 and more than 3 years after he was granted promotion in Grade 7." ;