Shiv Pujan Prasad Shrivastava v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.888 of 2020 ====================================================== 1.

Shiv Pujan Prasad Shrivastava S/o Late Jay Mangal Prasad Srivastava Residence of Village Indrawa, P.O.- Indrawa Fulwar, Via- Bhelwa Circle, P.S.- Lakhaura, Distt- East Champaran.

2.

Vashishtha Narayan Prasad Yadav S/o Late Hakim Rai Residence of Pakriya Tola Fatehpur, Ward No.5 P.O.- Majirawa, Via- Bhelwa Circle P.S.- Lakhaura, Distt- East Champaran.

3.

Satya Narayan Prasad S/o Late Yadav Lal Rai Resident of Village Dhum Nagar, P.O.- Nimuiya, Via- Bhelwa Circle, P.S.- Ghorasahan, Distt- East Champaran.

4.

Ram Bharos Mishra S/o Suraj Mishra Residence of Village Gola Pakariya, P.O.- Majirawa, Via- Bhelwa Circle, Distt- East Champaran. 5.

Gaya Shankar Prasad S/o Late Kailash Prasad Residence of Village and P.O.- Indrawa Fulwar, Via- Bhelwa Circle, P.S.- Lakhaura, Distt- East Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2.

District Education Officer, East Champaran at Motihari. 3.

The Director, Primary Education, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna.

4.

The District Education Officer, East Champaran ay Motihari. 5.

The District Magistrate-cum-Chairman, District Promotion Committee Motihari, District East Champaran.

6.

The District Programme Officer (Establishment) East Champaran at Motihari.

7.

The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shyama Kant Singh For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Ranjan Kumar (Ga12) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 24-02-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

Grievance of the petitioners in the present application

Patna High Court CWJC No.888 of 2020(3) dt.24-02-2020 2/2 is denial of benefit of ACP.

Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners would submit that the petitioners were appointed on 10.5.1973 and they have superannuated but they were not granted the benefit of ACP in terms of ACP rules.

Since the petitioners have superannuated, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to examine the claim of the petitioners and if the petitioners are otherwise eligible for grant of promotion under the ACP scheme, the same should be granted to the petitioners at the earliest, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. (Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) Ravi/- U