SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Jhk) 72

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Deepak Roshan, J.
Dr. Rabindra Kumar Roy, son of Shri Jaynarayan Roy - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary/ Principal Secretary, Department of Higher & Technical Education - Respondent
W.P.(S). No. 5776 of 2019
Decided On : 15-01-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Manoj Tandon, Advocate Mr. Ranesh Anand, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Vishal Kr. Rai, AC to GA-IV, Mr. Kumar Harsh, Advocate, Mr. Harsh Vardhan, Advocate

Time-bound promotion, as a financial upgradation, requires counting continuous service from the initial appointment date, ensuring eligibility is based on actual service rendered.

Headnote:(A) Bihar State Universities Act, 1976 - Time Bound Promotion Schemes - The petitioner sought promotion from Lecturer to Reader and subsequently to Professor, arguing entitlement upon completion of requisite service. The court found the initial appointment date of 25.02.1983 relevant for considering continuity of service. The court held that denial of time-bound promotion was unfounded, as it constitutes financial upgradation rather than standard promotion. (Paras 3, 7, 22, 24)

(B) Promotion Rights - The right to time-bound promotion is not a fundamental right, but eligibility based on completed service is recognized under the statute. (Paras 22, 23)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner was appointed as a Lecturer on 25.02.1983 and sought promotion under the Time Bound scheme after repeated requests were ignored. The impugned order dated 22.05.2019 withheld promotion, which the petitioner challenged in court.

Findings of Court:
The court directed that the petitioner’s services be calculated from 25.02.1983 for entitlement under time-bound promotion schemes and quashed the impugned order.

Issues: Clarification on the applicability of the initial appointment date for time-bound promotions and the nature of financial upgradation.

Ratio Decidendi: Time-bound promotion is a financial mechanism to prevent stagnation, distinct from regular promotion, which cannot be granted retrospectively. The petitioner is entitled to monetary benefits calculated from the initial date of appointment.

Result: Writ application allowed, and respondents directed to grant monetary benefits within 12 weeks.

Table of Content
1. time-bound promotion requires 10 years of continuous service. (Para 2 , 7 , 12)
2. petitioner's appointment history and college status. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
3. court supports time bound promotion with initial service date. (Para 8 , 9 , 15)
4. initial appointment date affects promotion eligibility. (Para 10 , 11 , 14)
5. service count for promotion includes all service types. (Para 19 , 24)
6. distinction between financial upgradation and regular promotion. (Para 20 , 21 , 23)
7. court order to grant time-bound promotion and benefits. (Para 22 , 25)

JUDGMENT :

DEEPAK ROSHAN, J.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner with following prayers:

(i) To quash and set aside the decision of the screening committee of not granting promotion to the petitioner under Time-Bound Scheme, which was communicated to the petitioner through a contained letter of in memo no VBU/P/HC/88/2017/1482/19 dated 22.05.2019.

(Annexure-13)

(ii) To direct the respondents, in particular respondent nos. 2 and 3, to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion from the post of Lecturer to the post of Reader and other consequential benefits. including the promotion to the next higher post of Professor, counting the services of the petitioner from the initial date of appointment on 25.2.1983 under the Time Bond Scheme of promotion.

(iii) To hold and declare that the initial date of appointment of the petitioner on 25.2.1983 would be the date for the purpose of counting of continuous services of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Reader and Professor respectively as per the scheme of Time Bond scheme.

(iv) To direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Reader and consequently to the post of Professor in accordance with law counting his services from 25.2.1983 i.e. the date of initial appointment.

(v) For any other appropriate relief/reliefs to which the petitioner is found to be entitled in the facts and circumstances of this case as also to do conscionable justice to the petitioner.

3. Briefly stated, the State of Bihar, Education Department sanctioned two posts of Lecturers in the pay-scale of Rs.700-1600 in Adarsh College, Rajdhanwar by letter dated 14.09.1982. Consequent thereto, the petitioner was appointed on sanctioned and vacant post of Lecturer in History subject by letter dated 24.02.1983 and petitioner gave his joining on 25.02.1983. Thereafter, on 10.12.1983, the Bihar College Service Commission, Patna granted concurrence to the appointment of petitioner w.e.f. 25.02.1983 i.e. the date of his joining. On 22.03.1985, the Bihar College Service Commission, Patna extended the concurrence on certain conditions relating to five Lecturers including the present petitioner.

4. Initially, the Adarsh College, Rajdhanwar was established in 1973 and was affiliated to Ranchi University, however, the said college was converted into constituent college of Ranchi University w.e.f. 11.01.1978. Thereafter, on the establishment of Vinoba Bhave University, the Adarsh College became a constituent college of Vinoba Bhave University, Hazaribagh and after formation of State of Jharkhand, the said college falls within the territorial limits of the State of Jharkhand.

5. In the light of orders passed by the Patna High Court in C.W.J.C. No. 4021 of 1995 and in pursuance of Section 4(14) of the Bihar State Universities Act, 1976, the services of the petitioner along with others were regularized w.e.f. 25.02.1983. The said judgment was challenged before the Hon’ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 6098 of 1997 and during the pendency of the said appeal, Hon’ble Supreme Court appointed Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.C. Agrawal to submit a report on the issue of regularization of services of teaching and non-teaching staff of constituent college.

6. Upon submission of report, the Civil Appeal No. 6098 of 1997 was disposed of. On 16.09.2005, Vinoba Bhave University i

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top