Ramashankar Panday v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8402 of 2022 ====================================================== Ramashankar Panday Son of Late Ambika Panday, resident of VillageSukharipur, P.S.- Sonhan, District- Rohtas. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Main Secretariat, Patna.

2.

The Director, Directorate of Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS), Indra Bhawan, Ram Charitra Singh Path, Boring Canal Road, Patna. 3.

District Magistrate, Patna.

4.

District Programme Officer (ICDS) Patna.

5.

Child Development Project Officer, Barh, Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Kishore Kumar Thakur, Adv.

Mr. Bijay Kumar Pandey, Adv.

Mr. Braj Kishore Singh, Adv.

Mr. Amit Kumar, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Mithilesh Kumar Upadhyay, AC to GP-3 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 18-06-2025 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner has preferred the writ petition for the following reliefs:- i) For a direction to the respondents to grant 1st, 2nd and 3rd ACP/MACP to the petitioner from due dates, by counting his entire period of service rendered by him in the Directorate of Adult and Non-Formal Education, in terms with the provision contained in rule 22 of the ACP/MACP rule 2010.

ii) For a further direction to the respondents to make payment

Patna High Court CWJC No.8402 of 2022(3) dt.18-06-2025 2/3 of arrears of salary to the petitioner in the pay scale of Rs.

5000-8000 (grade pay 4200) on grant of 1st ACP to him with effect from 9.8.1999 and further make payment of arrears of salary to him by fixing their salary in the pay scale of Rs 9300-34800 (grade pay 4600) on grant of 2nd ACP/MACP to him with effect from 2005 i.e, the period, the petitioner completed 24 years of qualifying service, in terms with ACP Rules 2003.

3. Adverting to the facts stated in the writ petition, learned Advocate for the petitioner contended that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered to the decision of this Court passed in C.W.J.C. No. 1937 of 2019, which came to be disposed off on 24.10.2024.

4. It is further contended that the issue posed before this Court has also come up for consideration in the case of Bipin Bihari Roy vs. The State of Bihar & Ors., in C.W.J.C. No. 11936 of 2011 which stood affirmed in L.P.A. No. 438 of 2017; reiterating the aforesaid decision this Court has also passed identical order in the aforenoted C.W.J.C. No. 1937 of 2019.

5. At this juncture, learned Advocate for the State submits at the Bar that whether the case of the petitioner stands on similar footing to that of Mahendra Jha or not is required to

Patna High Court CWJC No.8402 of 2022(3) dt.18-06-2025 3/3 be considered by the competent authority.

6. Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned Advocate for the respective parties, the present writ petition stands disposed off in identical terms of C.W.J.C. No. 1937 of 2019 dated 24.10.2024, with a direction to the respondent no. 3 to consider the case of the petitioner in the light of the aforenoted order, as also in the light of the Bihar State Litigation Policy, 2011, which mandates that all similarly situated employees should be given the benefit of covered matters; and if the claim of the petitioner finds identical to Mahendra Jha and the petitioners of aforenoted case, identical relief must be accorded to the petitioner.

7. The entire exercise must be completed within a period of twelve weeks' from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

8. The writ petition stands disposed off with the aforesaid direction.

(Harish Kumar, J) shivank/- U