Judgment 1. The petitioner was appointed as a primary school teacher in 1947. In those days middle pass candidates could be made primary school teachers. After about 12 years of service the petitioner was confirmed, with effect, from 1st September, 1959. The petitioner could not subscribe to the provident fund as there was no allotment for 49 posts of teachers by memo no. 5434 dated 24th September, 1959 (annexure 1 series to the writ petition). This case is from Gaya. Subsequently, an issue arose as to when the petitioner could receive the benefit of time bound promotion depending number of years of service he had put in. It appears that an issue was raised by the State respondents that as from the date of circular no. 1457 dated 14th August, 1986 (annexure 6 to the writ petition), time bound promotion would be granted for the first time with effect from 1.4.1981. This was dealing with the matter in negative aspect. 2. The issue clearly was whether time bound promotion should be reckoned from the date when a person entered in service? In this regard it would be best that the circular of the Government be noticed. It is reproduced. (Local Language) 3. In the circumstances, there is no element of doubt that this circular prescribes that the time bound promotion will be reckoned from the date the teacher entered in service. Thereafter 10 years of service and again if a teacher has put in another 15 years he would be entitled to another time bond promotion. 4. In the circumstances, requiring the petitioner to refund the emoluments received, as extra payment and consequently to reduce his pension is against the circular. The respondents have certified and accepted the record that the petitioner-appellant entered service in 1947 and retired in 1988. He put in forty-one years of service. According to the circular, particularly the introductory clause and sub clauses (1) & (4), the appeal is allowed with costs. The order dated 3rd September 2002 passed in C.W.J.C. .No. 9519 of 2000 is quashed.