STATE OF JHARKHAND Vs. RAJENDRA PRASAD MAHTO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is filed against the order dated 24.06.2013 passed in W.P.S No. 1676 of 2010 whereby the writ application filed by the respondent was allowed in part to the extent of cancellation of the order granting 2nd ACP to the respondent and further directed the appellants to calculate the arrears of service terminal benefits as well as the retiral dues in terms of his first promotion and order of 2nd ACP from the date of the order within 2 months.

(2.) The facts of the case in brief is that the Respondent was appointed as Excise Constable in the pay scale of 105-2-195-3-204 on 19.11.1974 and he was given temporary promotion vide Office Order No. 3598 dated 17.06.1983(61/V) issued by the Secretary to the Commissioner of Excise to the post of Excise Clerk and he gave joining on 21.06.1983 in the pay scale 580-10-620-15-770 E.B. 15-860/-. The respondent got first ACP (Assured Career Progression) with effect from 09.08.1999 in the pay scale of Rs. 4500-7000 and also got Second ACP with effect from 21.06.2007 in the pay scale of Rs.5000-8000 provisionally (vide office order no.862 dated 28.6.2008) with a condition that within one year the confirmation order of the Department of Finance, Jharkhand would be obtained on such grants of financial up gradation given to the respondent. In the meantime, the respondent retired on 31.01.2009.

(3.) In the light of the advice of the Finance Department in paragraph 3(v) of the resolution no.5207/F dated 14.8.2002, the Department of Excise and Prohibition issued an order vide Memo No. 473 dt. 17-03-2010 and the previous order relating to financial up gradation of the respondent was cancelled. Thereafter, the respondent filed writ being W.P.S No. 1676 of 2010 for quashing the memo no. 473 dated 17.03.2010 and the same was allowed on 24.06.2013 to the extent that the respondent is entitled to the benefits 2nd ACP by holding that the policy decision of granting ACP does not show that if a person is given promotion with certain scale he shall not be entitled for the benefits of 2nd ACP on completion of 24 years of service. Aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge the appellant has filed the present appeal.