JUDGMENT : (Anshuman, J.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for Bihar State Power Holding Company Ltd. 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners for the following reliefs :- “(i) For setting aside the order contained in urgent notice issued /passed by the Officer on Special Duty (HR & Admin.), Bihar State Power Holding Company Limited, Patna where under and whereby candidature of petitioners under Employment Notice No.02/2014 (Internal) has been rejected holding them disqualified for the same in the light of resolutions issued by General Administration Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. (ii) Further for a direction upon the respondents to declare their results and grant them promotion to the post of Correspondence Clerk along with all consequential benefits with effect from the date when similarly situated persons have been appointed on the said post. (iii) Further for quashing of order contained in Memo no.389 dated 29.03.18 whereby and whereunder promotion of employees who obtained Sahityalankar degree before 07.05.12 has been held as valid in complete breach of general instructions issued by the General Administration department contained in Memo no.10878 dated 24.08.17 and fresh appointment by way of promotion has been totally banned. (iv) For any other relief/relief to which petitioner is entitled in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner No.1 and 2 were appointed as Messenger on compassionate ground vide Memo No. 2475 dated 25.06.2003 and Memo No. 766 dated 24.02.2003 respectively by the General Manager-cum-Chief Engineer, PESU on Class-IV post and they joined on 26.06.2003 and 25.02.2003 respectively and presently working in PESU area. Learned counsel submits that during service period, the petitioners were obtained the degree of Sahityalankar taking due permission from their employers. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the Bihar State Power Holding Company Ltd. has published and invited an application vide employment Notice No.2 of 2014 for the eligible candidates employees working on Class-IV post in its regular establishment and in regular establishment of its subsidiary companies for various posts including the post of Correspondence Clerk, for which the qualifications was fixed as graduation from recognized university/institution. Learned counsel submits that the petitioners have obtained the degree of graduation which is equivalent to Sahityalankar from Hindi Vidhyapeeth, Deoghar prior to 2012 and there was no bar made in the said advertisement and the said degree was fully recognized. Learned counsel further submits that the examination took place in compliance of Advertisement No.2 of 2014. Petitioners participated in the examination process but could not succeed in first attempt. No fresh advertisement has come and later on re-examination was notified for unfulfilled 54 post of Correspondence Clerk on 10.03.2016, in which the petitioners participated. They declared pass but were not provided marksheet despite their repeated demands. Instead of publication of result, respondents have cancelled the candidature of petitioners on the basis of Resolution No.5267 dated 08.04.2016 and Resolution No.10878 of 24.08.2017 issued by General Administrative Department, Govt. of Bihar without giving the petitioners any individual notice or hearing. Learned counsel for the petitioners next submits that as per the General Administrative Department Resolution which has been published in compliance of order passed in C.W.J.C. No. 13343 of 2011, the State Government decided not to treat certificate of Sahityalankar of Hindi Vidhyapeeth as valid, since, after 07.05.2012, but prior to that date, the degree is still valid. Learned counsel further submits that admittedly, the petitioners have obtained the said degree of Sahityalankar prior to 07.05.2012. Therefore, their degrees were valid and the respondents be directed to publish the result of their re-examination and they may not be sat over the matter. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the said letter by which the candidature of the petitioners has been cancelled which is Annexure-8, letter dated 28.09.2017, has been challenged in the writ petition. 4. Learned counsel for the Bihar State Power Holding Company Ltd. on the other hand hand submits that there are two Circulars of the Govt. of Bihar and decision of this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 07.05.2012 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 13343 of 2011 are very much relevant. Counsel for the Company submits that the submissions made by the petitioners may not be accepted, due to the reason that in the said decision, it has not been held that any degree obtained prior to 07.05.2012 shall be valid, rather it has been held that any appointment or promotion taken on the basis of this degree prior to 07.05.2012 shall be held valid. And therefore, the counsel for company submits that the counsel for the petitioners has misconstrued the said decision and circulars, as by virtue of the degree obtained from the said institution, petitioners want to take benefit after the said decision for the purpose of fresh appointment on the post of Correspondence Clerk, and therefore, in no case the case of petitioners could be taken into consideration and as such petitioners have no case. 5. In response thereof, counsel for the petitioners relied on a letter No.389 dated 29.03.2018 which has been issued by the Addl. Secretary of Bihar State Power Holding Company Ltd. indicating that promotion of Correspondence Clerk be given promotion even after 08.04.2016. Therefore, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the said Memo No.389 dated 29.03.2018 supports the case of the petitioners and petitioners are entitled for the relief. 6. After hearing the arguments and perusal of the documents, it transpires to this Court that for the purpose of deciding this case, it is necessary to quote those important points which are available in the said judgment, circulars and letters which are as follows. 7. Para 27, 28 and 29 of the Judgment of C.W.J.C. No.1334 of 2011 with batch cases in Order dated 07.05.2012 states as follows :- “27. To sum up therefore, this Court categorically holds that a Sahityalankar degree is not equivalent to graduation and no holder of a degree of Sahityalanakar, therefore, can claim the benefit of promotion to the Subordinate Education Service as a matter of right. The recognition if at all given by the State is with a limited object which has been talked about earlier, that is for the purpose of qualifying any Hindi examination and drawing advantage thereof in service and not to beget appointment based on the eligibility laid down for such recruitment or promotion by treating such degree to have equivalence. 28. A Sahityalankar degree therefore is not equivalent to graduation degree in light of what has been held by this Court in this decision and therefore none of the petitioners have been illegally and arbitrarily discriminated by refusal of the State to bring them within the zone of consideration for promotion to the Subordinate Education Service. 29. All these writ applications are dismissed being devoid of merit. 8. 29. All these writ applications are dismissed being devoid of merit. 8. The relevant portion of Notification issued by General Administrative Department vide letter No.5267 dated 08.04.2016 para -5 as follows :- 5- mi;qZDr of.kZr rF;ksa ,oa lh0MCyw0ts0lh0ua0& 13343@2011 esa ekUuh; mPp U;k;ky; iVuk }kjk ikfjr fnukad&07-05-2012 ds leqfDr;ksa (Observation) ,oa U;k;kns'k ds vkyksd esa leqfpr fopkjksijkar fgUnh fo|kihB] nso?kj }kjk iznŸk fofHkUu mikf/k;ksa dh ekU;rk laca/kh foHkkxh; vkns'k Kkikad& 8@vkj0 1&303@84dk0& 541 fnukad&11 tuojh] 1991 dks mDr U;k;kns'k dh frfFk vFkkZr~ fnukad&07-05-2012 ls fujLr fd;k tkrk gSA mDr frfFk ls iwoZ fgUnh fo|kihB] nso?kj }kjk iznŸk fofHkUu mikf/k;ksa ds vk/kkj ij dh x;h fu;qfDr@izksUufr ij bldk dksbZ izHkko ugh iM+sxkA 9. As well as paragraph 4 and 5 of Notification issued by General Administrative Department, Govt. of Bihar in letter No.10878 dated 24.08.2017 as follows :- ^^4-izklafxd ekeys es fo}ku egkf/koDrk }kjk fn;s x;s ijke'kZ dk dk;Zdkjh va'k fuEuor~ gS& “Thus in my opinion, the clause simply means that appointment / promotions made/given on the basis of certificates issued by Hindi Vidyapeeth, Deoghar prior to 07.05.2012 until the issuance of the notification by the G.A.D. dated 08.04.2016 shall not be affected. This also makes clear that no further appointment/promotions can be given on the basis of certificates granted by Hindi Vidyapeeth, Deoghar treating it equivalent to Matric, I.A. and B.A.”. 5- vr% lE;d~ fopkjksijkar Li"V fd;k tkrk gS fd ^^fgUnh fo|kihB] nso?kj }kjk fnukad& 07-05-2012 ls iwoZ iznŸk mikf/k;ksa ds vk/kkj ij fnukad 07-05-2012 ls vf/klwpuk Kkikad& 5267 fnukad& 08-04-2016 fuxZr gksus ds chp ¼vFkkZr~ fnukad 08-04-2016 rd½ dh x;h fu;qfDr@izksUufr mDr vf/klwpuk ls vizHkkfor jgsxhA ijUrq fnukad 08-04-2016 ds i'pkr~ mDr mikf/k;ksa ds vk/kkj ij dksbZ fu;qfDr@izksUufr ugha dh tk ldsxh^^A 10. The relevant extract of letter No.574 dated 29.03.2018 is as follows :- Ekkeys dh leh{kk ds dze esa ;g rF; ik;k x;k fd fyfidh; laoxZ ,oa vU; laoxZ] ftuesa izos'kLrjh; in ij fu;qfDr ds fy, nso?kj fo|kihB ls iznŸk mikf/k ekU; Fkh ds deZpkfj;ksa dh fu;qfDr gks tkus ds mijkUr vius laoxZ esa mPprj in ij izksUufr gsrq ^'kS{kf.kd ;ksX;rk^ vk/kkj ugha gS cfYd izksUufr ojh;rk lwph ds vk/kkj ij nh tkrh gSA fyfidh; laoXkZ lfgr oSls laoxksZa es fuEukafdr ^vgZrk ,oa 'krsZ^ iwjh jgus ds vk/kkj ij gh foHkkxh; izksUufr lfefr }kjk mUgsa mPprj in ij izksUufr fn;s tkus ij fopkj fd;k tkrk gS& (i) izksUufr ds in dk miyC/k fjfDr (ii) ojh;rk lwph (iii) fu/kkZfjr dkykof/k (iv) foHkkxh; ijh{kk dh mŸkh.kZrk (v) okf"kZd pkfj=h lkj@dk;Z vkpj.k izek.k&i= (vi) LoPNrk@ vkjksi jfgr izek.k&i= vr,o ,rn }kjk mi;qZDr of.kZr rF;ksa ds vkyksd esa fuEufyf[kr fu.kZ; fy;k tkrk gS& (1) fyfidh; laoxZ esa tks Hkh fu;qfDr;kWa fnukad 07-05-2012 ds iwoZ fgUnh fo|kihB] nso?kj }kjk iznŸk mikf/k;ksa ds vk/kkj ij fnukad 08-04-2016 rd gqbZ gsS] mudh fu;qfDr ekU; gSA (2) fnukad 07-05-2012 ds iwoZ fgUnh fgUnh fo|kihB] nso?kj }kjk iznŸk mikf/k;ksa ds vk/kkj ij fnukad 08-04-2016 rd fu;qDr deZpkfj;ksa dks izksUufr gsrq mij of.kZr vgZrkvksa ds vk/kkj ij tks izksUufr;kWa o"kZ 2016&2017 rd nh xbZ gS] oks izksUufr ekU; gS] D;ksafd izksUufr dh izfdz;k esa Lukrd 'kS{kkf.kd ;ksX;rk dksbZ vgZrk ugha gSA (3) mi;qZDr dafMdk&2 ds vkyksd esa fnukad&07-05-2012 ds iwoZ fgUnh fo|kihB] nso?kj }kjk iznŸk mikf/k;ksa ds vk/kkj ij fyfidh; laoxZ rFkk HkaMkj laoxZ ds deZpkfj;ksa dks vius laoxZ esa fnukad 08-04-2016 ds i'pkr Hkh izksUufr nh tk ldsxhA 11. Upon bare perusal of the judgment passed by this Hon’ble Court in batch case, it become crystal clear that without insertion of any cut off date, this Hon’ble Court has categorically held that Sahityalankar degree is not equivalent to graduation and no holder of degree of Sahityalankar, therefore, can claim the benefit of promotion to the Subordinate Education Service as a matter of right. It also transpires to this Court that vide different Notification Nos.5267 dated 08.04.2018 and Notification No.10878 dated 24.08.2017, Govt. of Bihar has recognized the degree of Sahityalankar issued from Hindi Vidyapeeth, Deoghar only and only for the purpose of appointment and promotion which has already been taken place prior to the date of the judgment, i.e., 05.07.2012. It also transpires to this Court that vide different Notification Nos.5267 dated 08.04.2018 and Notification No.10878 dated 24.08.2017, Govt. of Bihar has recognized the degree of Sahityalankar issued from Hindi Vidyapeeth, Deoghar only and only for the purpose of appointment and promotion which has already been taken place prior to the date of the judgment, i.e., 05.07.2012. As according to law, every law has its prospective effect and not retrospective, particularly when not expressly or explicitly narrated/ stated. Upon going though the letter dated 29.03.2018, it transpires to this Court that saving to promotion has been made for those persons, who were appointed prior to 07.05.2012 on Correspondence Clerk and Store Assistant category. Admittedly, the petitioners were not promoted on the said date and according to advertisement, the basic eligibility to appear in the examination was the graduation. It is also true that they filled upon the form in the year 2014 but it is also true that in the light of the advertisement, the said advertisement has also been exhausted, they have not completed and department has decided to take fresh examination though the official have given its name re-examination which is basically wrong nomenclature in the view of the Court, and particularly in the light of the said Circulars and decisions made by the High Court, this Court of the firm view that petitioners have no case in the light of those circulars and the decision of the Hon’ble High court and hence this writ petition is dismissed.