JUDGMENT S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant-State of Jharkhand against the judgment dated 29th April, 2003 passed by learned Single Judge in W.P.(S) No. 5129 of 2002, whereby and where under, the learned Single Judge while held that the order recalling the time bound promotion granted to 1st respondent/writ petitioner as illegal, further held that no amount can be recovered from him and directed to the respondents to pay him the amount already recovered as also the pension, gratuity and other retiral benefits on the basis of last pay drawn by him. 2. The question to be determined in this appeal is whether the period of service rendered by 1st respondent/writ petitioner as Chawkidari Tahsildar can be counted for the purpose of time bound promotion and retiral benefits. 3. For determination of the issue, it is necessary to notice the relevant facts, as mentioned hereunder: The 1st respondent/writ petitioner was appointed as Chawkidari Tahsildar in the year 1955 under the Chotanagpur Division. At that time, there was a provision made under "Chotanagpur Rural Police Act, 1914 to appoint Unit Tahsildars (also known as Chawkidari Tahsildars) for each village to collect revenue (Chawkidari tax). They are not Government servant, though paid wages from the Government revenue. In the year, 1981, pay was revised by the State Government from its Finance Department vide Resolution No. 10770 dated 30th December, 1981; the pay of Chawkidari Tahsildars was also revised. Subsequently, it come to the notice of the State Government that pay of Chawkidari Tahsildars had also been revised vide Resolution No. 10770 dated 30th December, 1981, though they were not Government employee; by letter No. 2/PRC/4/84/5042/B dated 13th July, 1984 issued from Finance Department, Government of Bihar, the Accountant General, Patna was informed that Chawkidari Tahsildars being not Government employee, the Resolution No. 10770 dated 30th December, 1981 in respect to their pay have been deleted. By the said letter, the pay of Chawkidari Tahsildars was revised from Rs. 180-242 (old scale) to Rs. 535-765 (new scale) w.e.f. 1st April, 1981. It appears that Chawkidari Tahsildars and their association requested the State Government for absorption of Chawkidari Tahsildars in the services of the State. By the said letter, the pay of Chawkidari Tahsildars was revised from Rs. 180-242 (old scale) to Rs. 535-765 (new scale) w.e.f. 1st April, 1981. It appears that Chawkidari Tahsildars and their association requested the State Government for absorption of Chawkidari Tahsildars in the services of the State. It was accepted by the State Government by its decision contained in letter No. 2642/Ra dated 6th November, 1984 issued from Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar; the Accountant General (A & E) II, Bihar, Patna was informed with the decision of the State, as detailed hereunder: (i) Henceforth no Chawkidari Tahsildar will be appointed. (ii) The persons, who are working as Chawkidari Tahsildar, they be absorbed against the existing vacancy and further vacancies of Revenue Karmachari in different districts under North and South Chotanagpur Division as and when vacancy takes place, on the basis of their seniority as Chawkidari Tahsildar. Till such absorption is made, not to fill up the post of Revenue Karmachari from any other sources. The 1st respondent/writ petitioner, who was working as Chawkidari Tahsildar since 1955, was absorbed in the services of the State as Revenue Karmachari by letter No. 1317 dated 5th July, 1986 and within two years, he retired from the services of the State on 31st January, 1988. After five years of retirement, he preferred a writ petition, C.W.J.C. No. 494 of 1993(R), before the Ranchi Bench of the Patna High Court for payment of pension and other retiral benefits. A Bench of the Court by its order dated 11th April, 1994 without giving decision on merit, directed the authorities to decide the question involved in the writ petition and disposed of the representation. Subsequently, no action having been taken by the authorities, a contempt petition, MJC No. 350 of 1994(R), was preferred by 1st respondent/writ petitioner. While the 1st respondent/writ petitioner was in service, a question arose as to whether Chawkidari Tahsildars absorbed in the services of the State are entitled for time bound promotion and if so, whether the period rendered by them as Chawkidari Tahsildars be counted for the purpose of grant of time bound promotion. While the 1st respondent/writ petitioner was in service, a question arose as to whether Chawkidari Tahsildars absorbed in the services of the State are entitled for time bound promotion and if so, whether the period rendered by them as Chawkidari Tahsildars be counted for the purpose of grant of time bound promotion. By a letter No. 1317 dated 5th July, 1986 the Government of Bihar from its Revenue and Land Reforms Department, communicated the decision of the State that the pension, gratuity and other retirement benefits will be admissible to an ex-Chawkidari Tahsildar from the date he is absorbed in the services of the State. The decision was reiterated by a subsequent letter No. 1835/Ra dated 14th September, 1986 issued from Revenue and Land Reforms Department of Government of Bihar. It was also made clear that the time bound promotion and other benefits can be granted to those who have been absorbed in the services of the State from the date of their absorption. It appears that while the contempt petition filed by 1st respondent was pending before the Ranchi Bench of the Patna High Court, with a view to purge him from contempt, the Commissioner and Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms, Government of Bihar issued a letter No. 29/95-Ra, contained in Memo No. 598 dated 25th August, 1995; giving reference to the grievance made by the Bihar State Non-Gazetted Employees Union and that the Chawkidari Tahsildars absorbed in the services of the State are not getting pensionary benefit, it was informed to treat those employees in the Government service from the date of their initial appointment and to provide them the benefit of pension etc. The Ranchi Bench of the Patna High Court having noticed the fact that there was no deliberate inaction on the part of the opposite parties dropped the contempt proceeding. Thereafter, 1st respondent/writ petitioner was given time bound promotion, counting the period of service rendered by him as Chawkidari Tahsildar and was provided with the pension, gratuity etc. counting the aforesaid period of service rendered by him as Chawkidari Tahsildar. 4. Thereafter, 1st respondent/writ petitioner was given time bound promotion, counting the period of service rendered by him as Chawkidari Tahsildar and was provided with the pension, gratuity etc. counting the aforesaid period of service rendered by him as Chawkidari Tahsildar. 4. Learned Counsel for the 1st respondent/writ petitioner relied on the aforesaid letter dated 25th August, 1995 and submitted that the 1st respondent/writ petitioner having been treated to be in the services of the State since the date of appointment as Chawkidari Tahsildar, he was rightly granted time bound promotion and retiral benefits, such as pension, gratuity etc. According to him, the order of recovery was not permissible and is illegal. 5. Admittedly, the Chawkidari Tahsildars were not in the services of the State. They were not Government employee. For the first time, the State Government made a Scheme to absorb the Chawkidari Tahsildars in the services of the State against the post of Revenue Karmachari by letter No. 2642/Ra dated 6th November, 1984. It was decided to absorb them against existing vacant posts of Revenue Karmachari and in absence of vacancy, they will be absorbed against the future vacancies. Admittedly, the 1st respondent/writ petitioner was absorbed in the services of the State by letter No. 1317 dated 5th July, 1986 and retired within two years as Revenue Karmachari on 31st January, 1988. By the date he was absorbed, no decision was taken by the State Government to absorb him from retrospective date i.e. from the date of appointment as Chawkidari Tahsildars nor any subsequent order has been issued by the State Government absorbing him in the services of the State from retrospective date. Letter No. 1317 dated 5th July, 1986 by which he was absorbed has not yet been modified by the competent authority till date. 6. A Government servant is not entitled for pension if retires prior to 10 years of permanent service or 15 years of temporary service. A Government servant is entitled for 1st time bound promotion only on completion of ten years of service under the State Government. Admittedly, the 1st respondent/writ petitioner was absorbed In the services of the State of Bihar by letter No. 1317 dated 5th July, 1986 and retired from the services of the State on 31st January, l988. Therefore, he was neither eligible for time bound promotion nor he was eligible to get pension or gratuity. Admittedly, the 1st respondent/writ petitioner was absorbed In the services of the State of Bihar by letter No. 1317 dated 5th July, 1986 and retired from the services of the State on 31st January, l988. Therefore, he was neither eligible for time bound promotion nor he was eligible to get pension or gratuity. He having retired from the services of the State in January, 1988, there was no occasion for the respondents to absorb him in the services of the State from retrospective date in pursuance of a letter issued after seven years of retirement. Further, without any formal order absorbing a person in the services of the State, no person can be treated to be in Government service. It was also not open for the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department of Government of Bihar to treat the period of service rendered by a person as Chawkidari Tahsildar as services under the State; State Government was only competent to take such policy decision. 7. For the reasons aforesaid, we have no other option but to hold the decision taken by the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Revenue and land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar as contained in Memo No. 598 dated 25th August, 1995 as illegal. We also hold that the 1st respondent/writ petitioner was not entitled to get the (sic) promotion nor he was entitled for pension and gratuity, having worked for only two years under the State Government. 8. This appeal is, accordingly, allowed; the judgment passed by learned Single Judge in W.P.(S) No. 5129 of 2002 is set aside and the writ petition is dismissed. However, in the facts and circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs.