Judgment:
1. This appeal by the appellants-State is directed against the judgment dated 28th November, 2006, passed in W.P.(S) No. 3411 of 2006, whereby the learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the State to allow monetary benefit to the petitioner (respondent herein) of the pay scale of Rs. 10,000-15,200/- with effect from 23rd May, 2001 till 23rd May, 2004.
2. The undisputed facts are that: On 27th August, 2001 the respondent was deputed as In-charge Regional Director of Ranchi Regional Forensic Science Laboratory, Ranchi in the pay scale of Rs. 6,500-10,500/-, which he was getting since September, 1993. Subsequently, his pay was fixed in the pay scale of Rs. 10,900/-. Although his case was recommended for regular promotion but no action was taken. As a result, the petitioner filed writ petition being W.P.(S) No. 1059 of 2004, which was disposed of on 25th February, 2004 with a direction to the respondent-State to consider the claim of the petitioner (respondent herein) for promotion to the post of Regional Director. In compliance of the said direction the State vide notification tinted 27th March, 2006 promoted the respondent and placed him in a higher pay scale of Rs. 10,000-15,200/- with effect from 23rd May, 2001 with further placement in the higher pay scale of Rs. 12,000-16,500/- with effect from 24th May, 2004. However, this order was issued with a rider that this promotion in the pay scale of Rs. 10,000-15,200/-, granted with effect from 23rd May, 2001, shall be notional in nature. The respondent again moved this Court by filing W.P.(S) No. 3411 of 2006. The learned Single Judge after considering the fact that since 2001 the respondent was discharging the function of Regional Director in the capacity of In-charge Regional Director and having regard to the fact that the respondent was granted promotion on regular basis in the pay scale of Rs. 10,000-15,200/- with effect from 23rd May, 2001, held that the petitioner (respondent herein) will be entitled to the monetary benefit with effect from 23rd May, 2001 till 23rd May, 2004.
3. Mr. R. Krishna, learned Sr. Standing Counsel, assailed the impugned judgment mainly on the ground that the respondent ought to have been given the officiating allowance and not the notional promotion with monetary benefit.
4. We do not find any force in the submission of the learned Counsel for the appellants. As noticed above, the period for which the respondent continued as In-charge Regional Director, he was paid the pay scale of that post instead of giving officiating allowance as per the provisions contained in Bihar Service Code (now Jharkhand Service Code).
5. At this stage the appellant-State cannot be allowed to back out and say that the respondent would have been allowed only officiating allowance and not the monetary benefits on the basis of notional promotion, given pursuant to the government order issued on 27th March, 2006. In that view of the matter, we do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned judgment dated 28th November, 2006, as the same is wholly justified, particularly in view of the fact that the respondent has already retired in March, 2004. This Letters Patent Appeal is, thus, dismissed.
6. However, we observe that the same may not be a precedence but at the same time the State should be very careful in issuing such notifications giving the pay scale to the officers, who discharge the function as In-charge of that post.