ORDER : AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI, J. 1. Having given anxious consideration to the various submissions made by the parties and having perused the impugned judgment dated 30.11.2015 passed in CWJC No. 18733 of 2013 and the additional affidavits and materials, which have been provided by the Patna University to the Court, including the three member committee report, which has been tendered, we have no hesitation, prima facie, in reaching a conclusion that the manner in which large scale promotions have been granted to the teachers on the post of Readers/Professors has not been done in terms of the norms and the rules. What was the compulsion or the force behind such rushed decisions taken by the then officiating Vice Chancellor is not required to be discovered but obviously, there were reasons why those decisions were rushed through by a Vice Chancellor, who was in an ad hoc arrangement and was directed by courts to only perform routine day to day business. In some of the appeals, which were subsequently preferred and tagged along with the present case, the grant of such benefit of promotion is suspect in the eye of law. 2. But now that the present Vice Chancellor and the Registrar of the University are willing to redeem the prestige of the Patna University in the 100th year of their existence, by revisiting the decisions de novo objectively, dispassionately and with due honesty without succumbing to any pulls and pressures of the powers that be, the Court is inclined to give them an opportunity to test the bona fide of their submission made today that they will review all the promotions granted to the teachers in question in conformity with the norms and the rules. Any wrong decision naturally will be annulled and the honest decisions, which have already been taken, shall remain and continue to be operative. 3. Any wrong decision naturally will be annulled and the honest decisions, which have already been taken, shall remain and continue to be operative. 3. Since there are certain teachers, who made a grievance that their case was not fairly and objectively considered and they were kept out of the zone of consideration for other reasons, it is left open to such teachers to approach the Vice Chancellor of the University and even their cases will be considered and those cases are cases, which have arisen before this Court or were under consideration of this Court, but it will not amount to opening of a flood gate for every kind of claimants, who may awaken now to assert their rights. 4. The Registrar, who is present in person, assures the Court that the exercise in this regard will not be an endless exercise like an inquiry commission but will be expedited and concluded within a reasonable period and for which, he prayed for six months. 5. The Court is not willing to give them time of six months but would grant four months keeping in view that the University authorities are also preoccupied due to ongoing centenary celebration. The time frame indicated by the Court must be kept in mind and effort has to be made both by the Vice Chancellor and the Registrar to expedite the review process and reach conclusions and submit report in this regard by the next date. 6. Matter will come up on 12th of March, 2018.