JUDGMENT
1. The appellant preferred the writ petition for a direction on the respondents to provide him the benefits of first and second financial upgradation in pursuance of Assured Career Progression Scheme (hereinafter referred to as ACP Scheme). Learned Single Judge, having noticed that the appellant was allowed first time bound promotion in the year 1981 and second time bound promotion in the year 1992, refused to grant such relief.
2. It is not in dispute that the erstwhile State, of Bihar, through its Finance Department, while accepted the recommendation of the Pay Revision Committee, vide resolution No. 10770 dated 31st December, 1981, made provisions for time bound promotion. It was ordered to grant next higher scale on completion of 10th year of service (first time bound promotion), if an employee is otherwise eligible but not given promotion for want of vacancy. It was also ordered to grant second next higher scale of pay (second time bound promotion) on completion of 25th year of service, if otherwise the employee is eligible and fit but not given second promotion during his service career for want of vacancy. The aforesaid policy decision came into force with effect from 1st April,1981, in pursuance of which a number of persons, including the appellant, were granted the benefits.
3. Admittedly, the time bound promotion policy was superseded by subsequent Finance Department Resolution No. 660 (F/2) dated 8th of February, 1999, whereby while the recommendation of Fitment Committee was accepted, the State Government abolished the existing policy of time bound promotion and selection grade with effect from 01.01.1996 and a common replaced scale was allowed. The benefit of time bound promotion was, thus, taken away with effect from 01.01.1996, subject to introduction of subsequent scheme. Subsequently, State of Jharkhand framed a scheme by Resolution No. 3/S-6 (Pronnati)-02/2002-5207 vi. dated 14th August, 2002, issued from the Finance Department, known as “ACP Scheme”, which was given effect from 9th August, 1999. It was ordered to grant benefit of first higher grade on completion of 12 years of service, subject to eligibility and passing of required departmental examination and fitness, in regular course, if a person is not granted promotion to the higher post for want of vacancy. Similarly, it was ordered to give benefit of second higher grade on completion of 24 years of service subject to eligibility, passing of requisite departmental examination and fitness, if the employee has not been granted promotion in his service career for want of vacancy. Similar ACP Scheme has been framed by the State of Bihar under proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India, by Notification No. 4685F(2) dated 25th June, 2003 giving effect from 9th August, 1999,and benefit of which any State Government employee can derive, who was in service prior to 15th November, 2000.
4. According to the respondents, the appellant was granted first promotion from the post of Junior Industrial Instructor to Senior Industrial Instructor with effect from 01.04.1973 and thus, he cannot claim for benefit of first ACP. They relied on his service records in this regard but neither the copy of order of promotion has been enclosed nor the details of notification has been given therein.
5. Learned Counsel for the appellant relied on order No. 3138 dated 19th November, 1998, issued from Labour, Employment and Training Department of Government of Bihar. From the said order it appears that the benefit of higher grade was allowed to Junior Instructors vide letter No. 3888 dated 18th December, 1973. The question arose as to whether the said benefit was granted by way of promotion or upgradation. The matter moved before the Patna High Court wide C.W.J.C. No. 6682 of 1996 [Ramji Prasad Singh v. The State of Bihar and Ors.], wherein, a Bench of Patna High Court vide judgment dated 15th April, 1997 held that the Junior Instructors have been merely upgraded to the higher grade of Senior Instructors with effect from 01.04.1973 and that cannot be termed as promotion. The State of Bihar, from its Labour, Employment and Training Department, accepted the aforesaid ratio and issued Order No. 3138 dated 19th November, 1998. Thus, it cannot be held that the appellant was given promotion from the post of Junior Instructor to Senior Instructor with effect from 01.04.1973, since his pay was merely, upgraded to the higher grade.
6. Admittedly, the case of the appellant was not considered for any regular promotion to the higher post/rank in his service career, though he completed much more than 24 years of service. The time bound promotion, as was granted to him, was withdrawn in view of the Finance Department’s Resolution No. 660 dated 8th February, 1989. Thus, the appellant, being eligible, was entitled for consideration of his case for next higher grade on completion of 12th year of service on 9th August, 1999 whichever is later and the second higher grade on completion of 24th year of service of 9th August, 1999 whichever is later in terms with ACP Scheme issued by State of Jharkhand as well as State of Bihar. The respondents, having not considered the case of the appellant, are, accordingly, directed to consider his case and pass appropriate order within three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The order dated 07.04.2005 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(S) No. 1631 of 2005 is set aside.
7. This letters patent appeal is allowed with the aforesaid observations and direction. However, there shall be no order as to costs.