Dr. Arvind Kumar vs State of Bihar and Others

Narayan Roy, J.—Heard counsel for the parties. The grievance of the petitioner is that though he has been promoted to the post of Associate Professor (Eye) notion-ally he is not being paid his consequential monetary benefits.

In this connection, learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to annexure 9 to I.A. No. 2506 of 2002, wherein it is mentioned that the petitioner has been promoted notionally, but he would not be entitled for anything save and except his pensionary benefits.

Since the petitioner was promoted notionally he was entitled to get the consequential monetary benefit in view of the ratio laid down by this Court in the cases of Md. Hafiz vs. State of Bihar and Ors., [2003(2) Pat.LJR 44] and Ramendra Pandey Vs. State of Bihar and Others, notwithstanding the provisions of Rule 58 of the Bihar Service Code.

In this view of the matter, the respondent authorities are directed to pay all consequential monetary benefits to the petitioner on account of promotion granted to the petitioner on the post of Associate Professor (Eye) within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. With the direction/observation aforesaid, this application is disposed of.