Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Ram Vilash Ram and anr. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.

Ram Vilash Ram and anr. vs State of Bihar and ors.

Disposition Appeal allowed Court Patna Decided Jan 29, 2004
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/127726

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Patna High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
CWJC No. 2947 of 1999
Subject
;Service
Disposition
Appeal allowed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Service law - Promotion--Consequential benefit--On account of nonavailability of service books--Petitioners cases not considered--Laches on the part of respondent authorities--Direction to fix date of selection committee to consider cases of petitioners for their promotion and for all consequential benefits--Applica...

Key legal issue
;Service
Outcome / disposition
Appeal allowed
Acts & sections
Service Law

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ram Vilash Ram and anr.

Advocate A.K. Tripathy, Adv.

Respondent

State of Bihar and ors.

Advocate Alamdar Hassan, GP-6

Legal References

Acts
Service Law

Excerpt

service law - promotion--consequential benefit--on account of nonavailability of service books--petitioners cases not considered--laches on the part of respondent authorities--direction to fix date of selection committee to consider cases of petitioners for their promotion and for all consequential benefits--application allowed. - - 3. precisely, it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioners were outlisted in the year 1990 by the central selection board and thereafter the central selection board by a subsequent meeting considered the cases of others and the cases of the petitioners were bypassed, as their service books were not made available to the committee.narayan roy, j.1.heard counsel for the parties. 2. by this application, the petitioners seek direction upon the respondents to consider their cases for promotion from the post of havildar to civil jamadar, now known as reserve sub-inspector (training) with effect from due date and consequential benefit. 3. precisely, it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioners were outlisted in the year 1990 by the central selection board and thereafter the central selection board by a subsequent meeting considered the cases of others and the cases of the petitioners were bypassed, as their service books were not made available to the committee. 4. from the materials on record, it appears that the petitioners' cases were not considered on account of non-availability of the service books. 5. it appears to be a case of laches on the part of the respondent authorities and, in that view of the matter, the authorities concerned may be directed to fix a date of selection committee to consider the cases of the petitioners in accordance with law. 6. for the reasons aforementioned, therefore, this application is allowed and the respondent authorities are directed to fix a date of the selection committee for consideration of the cases of the petitioners for their promotion on the post of reserve sub-inspector/civil jamadar with effect from the due dates and for all consequential benefits within a period of two months from the date of receipts/ production of a copy of this order.

Full Judgment

Narayan Roy, J.

1.Heard counsel for the parties.

2. By this application, the petitioners seek direction upon the respondents to consider their cases for promotion from the post of Havildar to Civil Jamadar, now known as Reserve Sub-Inspector (Training) with effect from due date and consequential benefit.

3. Precisely, it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioners were outlisted in the year 1990 by the Central Selection Board and thereafter the Central Selection Board by a subsequent meeting considered the cases of others and the cases of the petitioners were bypassed, as their service books were not made available to the committee.

4. From the materials on record, it appears that the petitioners' cases were not considered on account of non-availability of the service books.

5. It appears to be a case of laches on the part of the respondent authorities and, in that view of the matter, the authorities concerned may be directed to fix a date of selection committee to consider the cases of the petitioners in accordance with law. 6. For the reasons aforementioned, therefore, this application is allowed and the respondent authorities are directed to fix a date of the selection committee for consideration of the cases of the petitioners for their promotion on the post of Reserve Sub-Inspector/Civil Jamadar with effect from the due dates and for all consequential benefits within a period of two months from the date of receipts/ production of a copy of this order.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial