Kameshwar Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No 7574 of 2015 ====================================================== Kameshwar Singh, Son of Late Ram Bujhawan Singh, Resident of Anglo Indian Bachellor, Quarter No. 4, Alamganj Thana Campus, Gulzarbagh, P.S.- Alamganj, District-Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

The Principal Secretary-cum-Finance Commissioner, Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Director (Press and Stationery), Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4.

The Deputy Secretary (Press and Stationery), Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

5.

The Superintendent, Secretariat Press, Government of Bihar, Gulzarbagh, Patna.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== For the Petitioner/s :

Ms Anju Jha For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Gp10-Kumari Amrita ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 18-06-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent-State.

Petitioner was an employee of the Secretariat Press, Government of Bihar at Gulzarbgh on the post of Mono Operator.

Writ petition has been filed raising a grievance regarding non-grant of financial progression under the Assured Career Progression (for brevity, ACP) Scheme, 2003 and Modified Assured Career Progression (for brevity, MACP) Scheme, 2010 respectively.

Counter affidavit discloses that some proceedings were earlier pending against the petitioner in which he has been

Patna High Court CWJC No.7574 of 2015(2) dt.18-06-2019 2/2 finally exonerated on 18.09.2014, that is just prior to filing of the instant writ petition. It is the stand of the respondent-State that after completion of the proceedings, the Superintendent of Secretariat Press has already sent proposal on 12.02.2015 to the Finance Department for considering grant of ACP and MACP to the petitioner, as claimed in the instant proceedings. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to such proposal, being sent, she is not in a position to inform this Court whether the claim of the petitioner for grant of progression/promotion has been considered favourably or not. In the circumstances, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the instant proceedings pending.

Writ petition, therefore, is disposed of with a direction that if decision has not been taken pursuant to the proposal dated 12.02.2015, respondent-authorities should take a final decision in respect of the petitioner's claim expeditiously, without any undue delay and preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) M.E.H./- U