Patna High Court
Sachidanand PaswanversusThe State Of Bihar and Ors
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- PARTHA SARTHY
Holding
The Court held that passing the Departmental Accounts Examination is not a condition for granting ACP benefits under the ACP Rules, 2003, and set aside the Departmental Screening Committee’s decision.
Summary
The petitioner, a jail warden appointed in 1975, sought the grant of first and second Assured Career Progression (ACP) benefits under the ACP Scheme of 2003, which were denied by the Departmental Screening Committee on the ground that he had not passed the Departmental Accounts Examination. He contended that the requirement of passing the examination was not applicable to ACP benefits, relying on the Full Bench judgment in Kamlanand Thakur v. State of Bihar (2025). The Court examined the relevant provisions, namely Rule 157(3)[J] of the Bihar Board’s Miscellaneous Rules, 1958 and Rule 4(5) of the ACP Rules, 2003, and held that the former does not apply to ACP benefits. Accordingly, the Court set aside the Committee’s decision and directed the respondents to grant the ACP benefits within three months. The writ petition was therefore allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether passing the Departmental Accounts Examination is a condition for granting first and second Assured Career Progression benefits under the ACP Rules, 2003
- Whether Rule 157(3)[J] of the Bihar Board’s Miscellaneous Rules, 1958 applies to ACP benefits
- Whether the Departmental Screening Committee erred in denying ACP benefits on the basis of non‑pass of the examination
Subjects
- Assured Career Progression
- Departmental Accounts Examination
- Promotion Rules
- Jail Warden
- Writ Petition
- Service Benefits
- Bihar Board Rules
- ACP Scheme
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case no.1716 of 2017
======================================================
Sachidanand Paswan Son of Late Hari Lal Paswan, Resident of village .
Bajrangbali Nagar, P.S. Nayaram Nagar, District . Munger
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. The Director Administration Jail Directorate Department of Home, Bihar
3. The I.G. Prison, Government of Bihar, Patna
4. The Superintendent Sahid Jubba Sahani, Central Jail, Bhagalpur
5. The Superintendent District Jail, Banka
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vasant Vikash, Advocate
Mr.Sri Krishna Ranjan
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Saroj Kumar Sharma, AC to AAG 3
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL ORDER
5 12.01.2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the respondents.
2. The petitioner has filed the instant application for
the following reliefs.
“1. That the present writ petition is being filed
for quashing the order with respect to the
petitioner passed by the departmental Screening
Committee for granting first and second Assure
Career Progression (ACP) whereby and
whereunder the claim of Petitioner has been
rejected on the ground that the Petitioner was
not passed the departmental account
examination without considering the Resolution
issued vide notification No. 4685 F(2) dated
Patna High Court CWJC no.1716 of 2017(5) dt.12.01.2026
2/5
25.06.2003 issued by the Finance department
and Letter No. 4674 dated 15.05.1992 issued by
the Government and the said order
communicated vide memo 4542 no. was dated
04.08.2015 (Annexure-8) and for directing the
concerned authority to grant the benefit of first
and second A.C.P. in view of similarly situated
other employees have been paid the same and
for the other necessary relief/reliefs on the basis
of facts and circumstances as enumerated
hereinafter.”
3. Bereft of unnecessary details, it is the case of the
petitioner that he was appointed as a Jail Warden and posted at
Central Jail, Bhagalpur since 14.8.1975. It is submitted that
inspite of the Finance Department issuing guidelines for grant of
benefit of 1st and 2nd ACP under the ACP Scheme in the year
2003 and MACP Scheme in the year 2010, the petitioner was
not given the benefits inspite of his representations before the
respondent authorities. The claim of the petitioner finally came
to be rejected by the Departmental Screening Committee on
31.7.2015 on the ground that the petitioner had not passed the
Departmental Accounts Examination.
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the
petitioner that the issue as to whether passing of the
Departmental Accounts Examination is necessary for grant of
Patna High Court CWJC no.1716 of 2017(5) dt.12.01.2026
3/5
ACP benefits came to be decided in the case of Kamlanand
Thakur versus State of Bihar & Ors. (FB); 2025 (2) PLJR
623. The impugned order being in teeth of the said Full Bench
judgment, it is submitted that the same be set aside and the
application be allowed.
5. Though the prayer made in the instant application is
opposed by the learned counsel for the State of Bihar in
reference to the statement made in the counter affidavit,
however, it is not contested that the issue is now been decided
by the aforesaid judgment of this Court.
6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused
the material on record.
7. The question as to whether a person was required to
pass the Departmental Accounts Examination for grant of ACP
benefits under the ACP Rules, 2003 came for consideration
before this Court in the case of Kamlanand Thakur, wherein this
Court decided as follows:
48. Thus, the questions stand answered as
follows :-
(A.) Rule 157(3)[J] of the Bihar
Board’s Miscellaneous Rules, 1958, requiring
passing of Departmental Accounts Examination
for promotion, is not applicable in case of grant
of A.C.P. benefits under the A.C.P. Rules, 2003;
Patna High Court CWJC no.1716 of 2017(5) dt.12.01.2026
4/5
(B.) Rule 157(3)[J] of the Bihar
Board’s Miscellaneous Rules, 1958 is confined to
passing of preliminary examination/final
examination in Accounts only for the purposes of
confirmation, crossing the efficiency bar and
promotion to Selection Grade only and not for
regular promotion;
(C.) Rule 4(5) of the A.C.P. Rules,
2003 even though provides that the prescribed
requirements and mode of sanction of financial
progression under the scheme (A.C.P. scheme)
shall be the same which are prescribed under the
Recruitment/Service Rules for regular promotion
against vacancies and if the Rules/Resolutions
prescribe passing of Departmental Examination
or any qualification for promotion, that shall
also be an essential condition for sanction of
benefit under the scheme will not affect the claim
for grant of A.C.P. after completion of
twelve/twenty four years of under the A.C.P.
scheme is only in situ promotion and nothing
more. This is even notwithstanding any such
requirement of passing any Departmental
Examination or acquiring any educational
qualification for promotion under the
Service/Recruitment/Promotion Rules.”
8. This Court having held that the passing of the
Departmental Accounts Examination as required under the
Bihar Board’s Miscellaneous Rules, 1958 was not applicable so
Patna High Court CWJC no.1716 of 2017(5) dt.12.01.2026
5/5
far as grant of ACP benefits under the ACP Rules, 2003 are
concerned, in the opinion of the Court, the petitioner has made
out a case for grant of relief.
9. In view of the above, the decision of the
Departmental Screening Committee taken in its meeting held on
31.7.2015 so far as it relates to denying the petitioner the
benefits under the ACP Scheme on account of his not having
passed the Departmental Accounts Examination is set aside.
10. The writ application is allowed.
11. The respondents are directed to grant the ACP
benefits to the petitioner within a period of 3 months from the
date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
Bibhash
U
Checking your session…