Ram Chandra Chauhan vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 5935 Patna

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                   Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5490 of 2020
     ======================================================

Ram Chandra Chauhan Son of Late Ram Briksh Chauhan, Resident of Village Nawgarh P.S.- Bishrampur District- Palamu (Jharkhand).

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Home (Police), Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna.

3. The Inspector General of Police, Patna Zone, Patna.

4. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Shahabad Range, Dehri-on-Sone, Rohtas.

5. The Superintendent of Police, Rothas at Sasaram.

6. The Superintendent of Police, Sitamarhi.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Manish Kumar, GP 4 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 07-12-2021

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

In the instant petition, petitioner has prayed for

following relief/reliefs:

"Petitioner has filed the present Writ application for issuance of a Writ in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing upon the respondent concerned to consider the claim of the petitioner for grant of third A.C.P which is due since September 2016 and petitioner has ultimately retired from service from the post of A.S.I. of Police under District of Rohtas (Bihar) but his claim for grant of third A.C.P. has never been considered in pretext of punishment order of one Black Mark of Six months Vide District Order No. 644 of 2017 bearing Memo No. 1618 dated 30/4/17 issued under the signature of respondent S.P. Sitamarhi however the said punishment is with regard to allegation alleged on 17/10/16 Patna High Court CWJC No.5490 of 2020 dt.07-12-2021

which has come after due date of third A.C.P. of the petitioner and the same cannot be the basis for non consideration of valid claim of the petitioner as also for grant of consequential monetary benefit accrued out of grant of third A.C.P to the petitioner. And any other order or orders as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper."

Petitioner was subjected to disciplinary proceedings and

concluded in imposition of penalty withholding of increments for a

period of six months and it would be in vogue up to 30 th October,

2017. Even though petitioner is eligible to A.C.P. in the month of

November, 2016 due to pendency of inquiry, he was not extended

the benefit. He has attained age of superannuation and retired from

service in the month of February 2019. In the light of these facts

and circumstances, the concerned authority is hereby directed to

re-examine the petitioner's grievance relating to entitlement of

A.C.P. in the light of punishment dated 30th April, 2017 which is

invoked for a period of six months and he has attained age of

superannuation and retired from service in the month of February,

2019. Such examination shall be conducted within a period of two

months from the date of receipt of this order.

If the petitioner is otherwise eligible for A.C.P. which is

due, the petitioner shall be extended with monetary benefits. If he

is not eligible, in that event, necessary speaking order shall be

passed as to why petitioner is not eligible for A.C.P.

Patna High Court CWJC No.5490 of 2020 dt.07-12-2021

With the above observations writ petitions stands

disposed off.

(P. B. Bajanthri, J) GAURAV S./-

AFR/NAFR                NAFR
CAV DATE                NA
Uploading Date          09.12.2021
Transmission Date       NA