Madhuresh Prasad, J.—The writ petition has been filed for the following relief/s:—

(i) To issue a writ in the nature of certiorari for setting aside the order contained in letter no. 332, dated 09.02.2017 (Annexure-2) passed by the respondent no.3 by which the petitioner has been denied his promotion to the post of Superintending Engineer with effect from 27.12.1993 when it became due.

(ii) For commanding the Respondents to grant promotion to the petitioner on the post of Superintending Engineer with effect from 27.12.1993 when it became due with all consequential benefits.

(iii) For commanding the Respondents to revise the pension and other retiral dues of the petitioner consequent upon granting the aforesaid promotion and make payment of the arrears accrued thereon with interest.

(iv) For any other relief(s) for which the petitioner may be found entitled to in facts and circumstances of the case.

2. It is the petitioner’s case that he was working on the post of ‘Executive Engineer’ till his superannuation on 31.01.2001, in the Water Resource Department of the Government of Bihar.

3. After recommendation of the Bihar Public Service Commission (BPSC for brevity), the Respondent No.3, Joint Secretary, Water Resource Department, issued a notification dated 08.11.2001 containing list of 18 Executive Engineers, granting them promotion as ‘Superintending Engineer (Civil)’ in the pay scale of Rs.14300-400-18300/-. This notification contained a clause in para 2, which reads as follows:—

^^2- ÁksUur in ds osrukfn dk ykHk vfèklwpuk fuxZr gksus dh frfFk ds i'pkr~ inHkkj xzg.k dh frfFk ls ns; gksxk rFkk Hkwry{kh ÁHkko ls ÁksUur in dk ykHk foÙk foHkkx dh lgefr ds mijkar ns; gks] ijUrq ,fyftcqy inkfèkdkfj;ksa ds vèkh{k.k vfHk;ark ds inksa ij yxkrkj ÁHkkj esa jgus dh frfFk ls igys dh fdlh frfFk ls mPprj osrueku dk ykHk ns; ugha gksxkA**

4. In the list, petitioner’s name figures at Serial No.17. He has been granted promotion with effect from the due date i.e. on 27.12.1993, notionally.

5. It is apparent from subsequent order dated 24.02.2003 that after due consultation with the Finance Department and based on its recommendations, financial benefits were granted to 12 persons out of 18 from the notification dated 08.11.2001. These 12 persons were allowed actual benefits of the promotional post of Superintending Engineer with retrospective effect. The same has not been granted to the petitioner.

6. The petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that even after consultation with the Finance Department, he was not granted the benefit of promotion with effect from the due date, i.e. on 27.12.1993. As per the averments in the writ petitioner, the petitioner made two representations to the Respondent No.3, dated 02.04.2003 and 05.09.2008, raising his demand for consequential benefits with effect from 27.12.1993, in respect of his promotion as ‘Superintending Engineer’.

7. As a consequence of representations filed by the petitioner, the Accountant General was informed by Departmental letter dated 09.02.2017 (Annexure-11 to the writ petition) that the claim of the petitioner for the monetary benefit of promotion with retrospective effect was not admissible to the petitioner. It is this communication which is impugned in the instant writ proceedings.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the fact of promotion being due on 27.12.1993, not being in dispute, the petitioner cannot be made to suffer for delayed grant of the promotion under notification dated 08.11.2001. The petitioner cannot be made to suffer on account of delay by the Authorities in granting the promotion and the petitioner thus is entitled to consequential/monetary benefits with effect from the due date, i.e. 27.12.1993. He has relied upon decisions reported in 1990 (2) PLJR 248 and unreported decision of this Court in C.W.J.C. No.1631 of 1996.

9. Learned counsel for the State submits that clause 2 of the notification dated 08.11.2001 was clear to the extent that the petitioner was granted noti