High CourtsDivision Bench(2023) 07 PAT CK 0046

State Of Bihar vs Lutful Haque And Anr Son

Patna High Court · Decided on 14 July 2023

HON’BLE JUDGES
K. Vinod Chandran, CJ · Partha Sarthy, J
RESULT
Partly Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Letters Patent Appeal No. 632 Of 2018 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 17142 Of 2017, Letters Patent Appeal No. 411 Of 2018 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 19197 Of 2016

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

11 paragraphs · 412 words

Re. I.A. No. 2440 of 2018 (in L.P.A. No. 411 of 2018)

1.

The present application has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay of 84 days.

2.

Having gone through the affidavit, accompanying the delay condonation application, we are satisfied that there is sufficient cause for delay condonation.

3.

The delay in filing the appeal is condoned.

4.

I.A. No. 2440 of 2018 stands allowed.

Re. L.P.A. No. 632 of 2018 and L.P.A. No. 411 of 2018.

5.

The issue revolves around whether Assured Career Progression (ACP) can be granted to non-graduates which graduate qualification is essential for promotion to the post of Accounts Officers. The petitioners are all Accounts Clerks who claimed ACP on the basis of their length of service. A learned Single Judge of this Court granted the ACP dehors the qualification, which was challenged in appeal. A Division Bench of this Court found that the graduates who are not eligible to be promoted cannot claim ACP since stagnation in the post of Accounts Clerk was only by reason of their not being qualified for promotion. An appeal was filed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in which by judgment dated 25.4.2023, the prayer of the appellants were allowed in Civil Appeal No. _______of 2023 (arising out of SLP(C) Nos. 8219-8226 of 2019) Amresh Kumar Singh & Ors. Etc. versus The State of Bihar & Ors. Etc. It was held that despite the Accounts Clerks being not qualified with graduation and though they are not entitled to be promoted, they should still be granted ACP.

6.

We respectfully follow the aforesaid judgment.

7.

However, there is some distinction on facts in the two L.P.As.. In L.P.A. No. 632 of 2018 the 1st respondent has not completed 12 years in the post of Accounts Clerk and he is a non-graduate. He would not be entitled to ACP since he has not completed the necessary period of service. As far as respondent nos. 2, 3 and 4 are concerned, they are Graduates and are entitled to be considered for ACP.

8.

In L.P.A. No. 411 of 2018, the sole respondent is a non-graduate but has completed 12 years period in the post of Accounts Clerk. In such circumstances, he is entitled to ACP owing to the binding decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court Judgment.

9.

L.P.A. no. 411 of 2018 is dismissed and L.P.A. no. 632 of 2018 is partly allowed with the above observations.