Md. Motiur Rahman Aziz And ANR v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.1788 of 2016 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.22818 of 2011 ======================================================
1. Md. Motiur Rahman Aziz s/o Late Md. Hasan R/o Mohalla Brahamputra, Mehandi Hasan Chowk, P.S. - Brahampura, P.O.- MIT Brahampura, Distt. Muzaffarpur
2. Moinuddin Ahmad s/o Late Wasiuddin Ahmad R/o Vill.- Mansi Chapra, P.S. - Chakiya, P.O. - Bhuwan Chapra, Distt. - East Champaran ... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Through Chief Secretary Old Secretariat, Patna
2. The Principal Secretary Cabinet Secretariat(Rajbhasha) Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna
3. The Principal Secretary General Administration Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna
4. The Principal Secretary Finance Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
5. The Director, Raj Bhasha(Urdu) Directorate, Bihar, Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s :
Mr Abhinav Shrivastava Mr. Shailesh Kumar For the Respondent/s :
Mr. AC to GP 2 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI) Date : 13-12-2017 Delay of 47 days in preferring the appeal is condoned. I. A. No.7350 of 2016 is allowed. The matter is taken up on merits. Perused the order dated 22.06.2016. The valiant effort and the battle, which has been fought by the present appellants, did result in framing of a rule providing avenues of promotion etc. But alas, so far as these appellants are concerned, they are only the
Patna High Court LPA No.1788 of 2016 dt.13-12-2017 2/2 foot solider, who have not been able to derive benefit of their battle because both of them have superannuated and the rule is not retrospective but prospective.
This is the reason why the learned Single Judge whose persistence brought the end result by way of the rule being finally put in place. But then he also felt the difficulty in extending the benefit of the rule to the retired people since the rule came into effect after their superannuation.
Only history will remember them as valiant fighters but nothing more can be done for them by way of reward, especially of the monetary kind, which they are looking at. Appeal has no merit. It is dismissed.
(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) ( Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) sk AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 14.12.2017 Transmission Date NA