[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Jharkhand High Court
Murari Singh vs The State Of Jharkhand on 2 February, 2026
Author: Ananda Sen
Bench: Ananda Sen
2026:JHHC:2662
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(S) No.525 of 2026
------
Murari Singh, son of Late Sheo Narayan Singh, resident of Village
Dhangartoli, P.O. & P.S. Chatra, District Chatra. ... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand.
2. The Principal Secretary, Finance, Government of Jharkhand, office
at Project Bhawan, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagarnathpur, District Ranchi,
Jharkhand.
3. The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Government of
Jharkhand, Office at Van Bhawan, P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District
Ranchi, Jharkhand.
4. The Divisional Forest Officer, North Chatra Division, P.O. & P.S.
Chatra, District Chatra.
... ... Respondents
------
CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.
------
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Akhouri Sankalp, Advocate
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Munna Lal Yadav, Advocate
------
02/ 02.02.2026
By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the
following reliefs:-
"i) For direction to the respondents to provide the
benefits of 2nd ACP as a scale of 6500-10500/- to
the petitioner from the date of 30.07.2006 with
entire arrear monetary benefits with interest, as he
has been appointed in the service on 30.07.1982
as a Forest Guard.
ii) For direction to the respondents to grant the
benefits of MACP to the petitioner as the petitioner
has completed the service period of 30 years on
30.07.2012 with entire monetary benefits with
interest.
iii) For quashing and setting aside the office order
no.66 dated 20/09/2025 passed by Divisional
Forest Officer, Chatra North Forest Division
(Annexure-4) as being illegal, arbitrary and
contrary to law."
2026:JHHC:2662
2. Heard learned counsel representing the petitioner and
learned counsel representing the respondents.
3. The petitioner has been denied the benefit of 2 nd ACP and
MACP on the ground that he does not have the requisite educational
qualification for grant of regular promotion, thus, he also cannot be
considered for grant of 2nd ACP and MACP on the same ground.
4. The issue of non-fulfilment of the educational qualification
vis. a vis. grant of ACP, wherein the State had taken a ground that the
employee is not entitled for grant of ACP as he does not possess the
educational qualification to become an Accountant Clerk, has been
dealt with by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Amresh Kumar
Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Bihar & Ors. reported in 2023 SCC
OnLine SC 496 (decided on 25th April, 2023). In the said case of
Amresh Kumar Singh (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court, at para-
12 to 17, has considered the object and purpose of ACP, which reads
as hereunder:-
"12. It may be worth noting that the ACP
scheme was enforced on the recommendation of the
Fifth Central Pay Commission in context with Group
C and D employees and it provided monetary benefit
to the employees on completion of 12 years and 24
years of regular service who were not able to get
promotion. The scheme as such was anti-stagnation
and envisages merely placement of the employees
in the higher pay scale for the grant of financial
upgradation only without grant of actual promotion.
The benefit of the ACP as such is like granting non-
functional in situ promotion.
13. At the cost of repetition, it must be borne
in mind that the object of ACP is to avoid stagnation
where no promotional avenues are available. The
2026:JHHC:2662
grant of ACP is not technically a grant of promotion
but increase in the pay scale to the next higher
grade retaining the employee on the post held by
him. This is only to accord monetary benefit without
disturbing any seniority or actually effectuating
promotion to any higher post to avoid stagnation on
a particular post or pay scale for a very long period.
14. The object and purpose of ACP/MACP
Scheme has been reiterated by this Court in Union
of India v. C.R. Madhava Murthy, (2022) 6 SCC
183, as one to relieve the frustration on account of
stagnation and it does not involve actual grant of
promotional post but merely monetary benefits in
the form of next higher grade subject to fulfilment
of qualifications and eligibility criteria.
15. In sum and substance, both ACP and
MACP Schemes are schemes devised with the object
of ensuring that the employees who are unable to
avail of adequate promotional opportunities, get
some relief in the form of financial benefits.
Accordingly, the schemes provide for regular
financial upgradation on completion of 12-24 years
and 10-20-30 years of service without promotion.
They are incentive schemes for the employees who
complete a particular period of service but without
getting promotion for lack of promotional avenues.
The effect of the schemes must be judged keeping
in view the object and the purport of the scheme.
16. In Union of India v. G. Ranjanna reported
in (2008) 14 SCC 721, the three-Judges Bench of
this Court held that in situ promotions are made to
remove stagnation of grade C and grade D
employees by giving them certain monetary
benefits.
17. It was further observed that fulfilment of
educational qualifications prescribed under the
recruitment rules for the purposes of promotion are
not necessary for non-functional in situ promotion.
2026:JHHC:2662
In other words, educational qualification required
for the purposes of promotion is not necessary for
the grant of in situ promotion, i.e., only for
extending the monetary benefit where there are no
promotional avenues and the employees are likely
to be stagnated."
5. The case in hand is covered by the aforesaid judgment of
Amresh Kumar Singh (supra), as a plea has been taken by the
petitioner that the petitioner was appointed in the year 1982, when
Matriculation was not the minimum qualification for appointment. Thus,
when the petitioner was appointed in a period when Matriculation was
not the minimum criteria for appointment, the respondents now for
grant of 2nd ACP / MACP, cannot take a plea that the petitioner was a
non-Matriculate.
6. Thus, the impugned Office Order No.66 dated 20.09.2025
(Annexure-4 to the writ petition), is hereby set aside.
7. The respondents are directed to grant the benefit of 2nd ACP
and MACP to the petitioner from the date which he is eligible and pay
the arrears including refixation of the pensionary and post retiral
benefits.
8. The entire process should be concluded within a period of
twelve weeks, from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
9. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ
petition stands allowed. No order as to costs.
(ANANDA SEN, J.)
02nd February, 2026
Prashant. Cp-2
Uploaded on 05.02.2026
