Judgment 1. The petitioner was a Class-IV employee in the Health Department of the State and retired on 30th June 1996. 2. While in service, he was granted promotion to Junior Selection Grade and Senior Selection Grade, but was not provided the promotion to supertime scale. The grievance of the petitioner is that though he was eligible for promotion to supertime scale during service career having completed the Kalawadhi and was seniormost in the cadre, in spite of vacancy, he had not been promoted and made to superannuate. 3. On the other hand, those who were appointed after the petitioner had been granted promotion to supertime scale from retrospective date i.e. the date prior to the retirement of the petitioner, vide Notification is sued after his retirement on 4th December, 1996 and 28th April, 1997. 4. From the order, as enclosed as Annexure 5 series is dated 4th December, 1996 and 28th April, 1997, it appears that the same have been issued by the Superintendent and Principal, Rajendra Medical College, Ranchi. There is nothing on the record to show that the petitioner was in the said cadre, when he retired. 5. The counsel submits that even in his own cadre, there is a person promoted from earlier date. But in absence of any specific statement, no specific decision can be given in one or other end. 6. In the facts and circumstances, while I do not choose to give any finding, give liberty to the petitioner to move before the Director-in-Chief, Health service showing details of his service career, including the date on which he was promoted to one or other grade and the last place of posting. In the said application the petitioner may point out the names of persons who are stated to be junior but promoted to supertime scale. 7. On such representation, if any one or other person junior to the petitioner is found to have been promoted in the supertime scale, from a date prior to the date of retirement of petitioner (30th June,1996), without consideration of the case of the petitioner, the Respondents will be liable to consider the case of petitioner for such promotion from his due date/the date from which such junior, if any, promoted. 8. A decision, in this respect, be taken and communicated to the petitioner within three months from the date of receipt of such representation. 9. 8. A decision, in this respect, be taken and communicated to the petitioner within three months from the date of receipt of such representation. 9. If such benefit is granted, the petitioner will be entitled to consequetial benefit, including revision in the retiral benefits. 10. So far as non-payment of certain retiral benefits are concerned, the petitioner may approach the concerned authority who will look into the matter. 11. The writ petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid observations.