Promotion under public service must be timely and based on established qualifications without arbitrary delay; retrospective promotions are justified under prescribed eligibility criteria.

JUDGMENT :

Harish Kumar, J.

This Court has heard Mr. Y V Giri, learned Senior Advocate along with Mr. Rakesh Mohan Singh, learned Advocate for the petitioners and Mr. Prem Ranjan Raj, learned Advocate for the State. The intervenor respondents have appeared through Mr. Lalit Kishore, learned Senior Advocate along with Mr. Prabhu Nath Pathak, learned Advocate.

2. The petitioners, before this Court, are the Junior Engineers, who acquired qualification of Associate Membership of Institution of Engineers (hereinafter referred to as “AMIE”) or equivalent qualification in the year 2011-2012, while some of them have obtained the qualification in the year 2005, 2008, 2009 and 2010 are aggrieved with the inaction of the respondents in not considering their cases for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineers under 10 per cent quota from the date of completion of five years of service as Junior Engineers, qua the available vacancy in the cadre of Assistant Engineers in [k terms of paragraph no. 4 ¼[k½ of resolution contained in Memo No. 5008 (s) dated 22.07.1998. The petitioners further seek issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to shift back the date of their promotion with effect from 2012 and 2013, the year in which they have attained the eligibility for promotion and vacancy were available under 10 per cent quota in the cadre of Assistant Engineer in terms of the Bench decision of this Court in CWJC No. 16049 of 2016, which order has attained finality upon being implemented by the Road Construction Department by shifting back the date of promotion to the identically situated Junior Engineers. The petitioners further sought a direction to rectify the notification issued under Memo No. 4739 dated 14.05.2018 to the extent whereby, the Under Secretary, Rural Works Department as though belatedly extended the promotion to 32 Junior Engineers holding the qualification of AMIE or equivalent degree, including the petitioners against 10 per cent quota in the cadre of Assistant Engineers, but with effect from the date of issuance of the notification.

3. Before parting with this writ petition, it would be apposite to narrate the short facts of the case, which would be relevant for the present case. The petitioners were duly appointed as Junior Engineers in the year 1999 in terms of the Advertisement published by the Bihar Public Service Commission on the basis of a requisition made by Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar. Some of the petitioners were also appointed prior to the said advertisement. While the petitioners were discharging their duty on the aforenoted post, in the meanwhile, Government of Bihar in the Department of Road Construction vide resolution bearing Memo No. 5008 (s) dated 22.07.1998 enhanced the quota for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer from the post of Junior Engineer, having the qualification of AMIE or equivalent from 3 per cent to 10 per cent. The resolution aforenoted specifically provided that the benefit of promotion would be available under this quota of 10 per cent to all such Junior Engineer, who possessed such qualification of AMIE or equivalent, prior to the joining of service or those who had acquired such qualification during their service period and had rendered five years service in the cadre of Junior Engineer. The x stipulation under Clause 4 ¼x½ was amended vide resolution bearing Memo No. 2475 (s) dated 21.02.2008 and the bene