High CourtsDivision Bench(2004) 03 PAT CK 0056

Dr. Madhusudan Prasad vs State of Bihar and Others

Patna High Court · Decided on 19 March 2004 · Citation: (2004) 3 PLJR 304

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ravi S. Dhavan, C.J · Shashank Kr. Singh, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
L.P.A. No. 1391 of 1997

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 348 words
1.

Heard learned Counsel for the Appellant. No one represents the State or the private Respondents inspite of valid service of notice.

2.

The Appellant who is aggrieved by the order and judgment of this Court dated 3 October, 1997 in C.W.J.C. No. 4141 of 1991 confines his prayer only to the extent that after the debarment period was over and he had completed the minimum requirement of teaching experience i.e. six years, as a tutor and as persons who were senior to him as Assistant Professors had already been promoted as Associate Professors, he being the senior most, his case was required to be considered for promotion as an Associate Professor, if and when the next vacancy arose as per Annexure-8 to the writ petition.

3.

This Court taking into consideration the aforesaid aspects and going through the judgment and order of the writ court though finds no error in the same by which in view of provision relating to debarment as the Petitioner-Appellant had refused to join as an Assistant Professor had declined to interfere in the order of promotion of Respondent No. 6 as an Assistant Professor.

4.

The only aspect which is required to be considered now is as to whether in the list of Assistant Professors where the Appellant is now below the Respondents No. 6 and 10 and if they have either superannuated or have already been promoted as Associate Professor whether the Petitioner Appellant was required to be considered for promotion in the next existing vacancy of Associate Professor or not, if he was otherwise qualified. The debarment as the circular itself says is only for a limited period of three years. Subsequent thereto as the Appellant has the minimum requisite qualification and also has the requisite teaching experience, and if a vacancy so exists, he is required to be considered for promotion in accordance with law, if no other person senior to him is still awaiting consideration.

5.

The present appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above. The order of the writ court is also modified to that extent.