b. So far as the judgment passed in the case of L.P.A. No. 211/2009 (The State of Jharkhand vs. Dinesh Chandra Mahto) dated 19.05.2020 is concerned, the grievance of the original writ petitioner was that he was not granted promotion, whereas some of his juniors were extended such benefit. The point for consideration was if there is no fault on the part of the employee and if promotion has not been considered rather juniors to him have been promoted and if such person approaches the court and the court passed the order for consideration of the case for promotion, can such an employee be denied such monetary benefit retrospectively. The Hon’ble Division Bench was of the view that in normal circumstances, when the retrospective promotions are affected all benefits flowing therefrom, including monetary benefits, must be extended to an officer who has been denied promotion earlier and if a promotion is denied to an employee because of the mistake of the State and due to no fault of such employee, then the authorities are bound to pay the arrears of salary etc. upon giving him the benefits of retrospective promotion after realizing for mistake. In the present case, the D.P.C. was held on 30.07.2009 and the petitioner had retired on the very next date i.e., on 31.07.2009 and ultimately, the promotion was granted to the other persons on 03.08.2009. The present case is neither any case of delay and latches on the part of the respondents nor a case of grant of retrospective promotion and accordingly, the aforesaid judgment does not apply to the facts and circumstances of this case.
