Patna High Court
Jai Narayan Prasad vs The State Of Bihar And Ors on 23 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.24022 of 2018
======================================================
Jai Narayan Prasad S/o Late Kunj Bihari Singh, resident of Shivaji Nagar,
Sati Ashthan, P.O.-Masaurahi, P.S.-Masaurahi, District-Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Road Construction
Department having his office at Vishweshsaraiya Bhawan, P.S. Shastri
Nagar, District Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Finance, Govt. of Bihar having his office at old
Secretariate, P.S. Sachivalaya, District Patna.
3. The Engineer-in-Chief, Road Construction Department having his office at
Vishweshsaraiya Bhawan, P. S. Shastri Nagar, District Patna.
4. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna having his office at Birchand Patel
Path, P.S.- Kotwali, District Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vikas Mohan, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Manoj Kr. Ambastha- Sc26
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 23-02-2021
The present writ petition has been filed for directing
the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of
benefit of 1st and 2nd Assured Career Progression Scheme upon
completion of 12 years and 24 years of the service as also the
consequential benefits thereof.
2. The learned counsels for the parties have relied
upon a judgment rendered by this Court dated 18.06.2018
passed in CWJC No. 14609 of 2010 [Bijay Kumar Sinha vs.
The State of Bihar & Ors.], the relevant portion whereof is
reproduced herein below:-
Patna High Court CWJC No.24022 of 2018 dt.23-02-2021
"The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the only reason for denial of the 1st and 2nd A.C.P. to
the petitioner herein is the pendency of a
departmental proceeding, as has been contended in
the counter affidavit filed by the Respondents. The
learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon a
judgment reported in 2008(4) P.L.J.R. 244 (Ranjan
Kumar Chauhan v. State of Bihar) to contend that in a
similar situation where the petitioner of that case was
denied grant of benefit of the A.C.P. Scheme on
account of pendency of a departmental proceeding
and a criminal proceeding, this Court had directed for
considering the case of the said petitioner for granting
the benefit of the Assured Career Progression
Scheme.
It is a trite law that the benefit of Assured Career
Progression Scheme is not a promotion in the sense
of the term of a vertical movement from a lower post
to a higher post, but it is only a grant of certain
monetary benefits on the same post on account of
stagnation on the said post. In such view of the
matter, the Respondent-authorities cannot deny the
grant of benefits of the Assured Career Progression
Scheme to the petitioner herein, especially, in view of
the fact that there is no such notification / circular of
the State Government which bars grant of the benefits
of the Assured Career Progression Scheme on
account of pendency of either the departmental
proceeding or a criminal proceeding.
In such view of the matter, I find that the petitioner
is entitled to be granted the benefits of the Assured
Career Progression Scheme de-hors the fact that a
C.B.I case is pending against him.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the
case, more particularly the fact that the
Respondents, in their counter affidavit, have failed
to produce any notification or circular of the State
Government to show that the benefits of Assured
Career Progression Scheme cannot be granted to a
Patna High Court CWJC No.24022 of 2018 dt.23-02-2021
person against whom either a departmental
proceeding or a criminal proceeding is pending, the
present writ petition is allowed and the
Respondents are directed to grant the benefits of the
1st and 2nd Assured Career Progression Scheme to
the petitioner within a period of four weeks from
today. The consequential benefits be granted within
a period of six weeks thereafter.
The writ petition is allowed."
3. In the present case also, the petitioner has been
denied benefits of the Assured Career Progression Scheme, as
aforesaid, merely on the ground that a criminal case is pending
against him.
4. This Court finds that the present case is squarely
covered by the law laid down in the case of Bijay Kumar
Sinha (supra), hence with the consent of the parties, the present
writ petition stands disposed of in terms of the judgment
rendered in the case of Bijay Kumar Sinha (supra). The
Consequential benefits shall follow.
5. The writ petition stands disposed of.
(Mohit Kumar Shah, J)
Tiwary/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 24.02.2021
Transmission Date N/A
