Patna High Court
Vijay Kumar PadmaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PRAVEEN KUMAR
Holding
The court disposed of the writ petition, directing the petitioner to file a fresh representation and the respondent to decide it within a stipulated time, without issuing a mandamus.
Summary
Vijay Kumar Padma filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Bihar Excise Department to grant him the Second Assured Career Promotion (ACP) benefits effective from 16 June 2004, based on a finance department notification, and to adjust the date of his third MACP. He alleged that despite entitlement, the benefits had not been conferred and his representation on the matter remained pending. The State of Bihar did not oppose his claim. The Patna High Court observed that the petitioner's representation was still under consideration and, instead of issuing mandamus, directed the petitioner to file a fresh, comprehensive representation within two weeks, attaching all prior documents. The court further ordered the respondent authority to decide the representation within 45 days of receiving the court's order and to communicate the decision promptly. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of without granting the relief sought.
Issues considered
- What relief, if any, can be granted by a writ of mandamus when the petitioner’s representation on the claim is still pending before the respondent authority?
Subjects
- mandamus
- career promotion
- government service
- representation
- administrative law
- writ petition
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.291 of 2026
======================================================
Vijay Kumar Padma S/o Late Ram Lakhan Prasad, R/o Village- Arhwan,
P.S. Wazirganj, District- Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Prohibition,
Excise and Registration Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Commissioner, Excise, Department of Prohibition, Excise and
Registration, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Joint Commissioner, Excise, Department of Prohibition, Excise and
Registration, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
4. The Assistant Commissioner, Excise, Department of Prohibition, Excise
and Registration, Darbhanga.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shiv Kumar, Adv.
Ms. Sweta Burnwal, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Additional Advocate General (4)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 31-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State.
2. The petitioner has preferred this writ
application with the following reliefs;
“I. That the present application is for
issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus
directing the respondent authorities to give the
benefit of Second Assured Career Promotion,
hereinafter referred to as ACP, to the petitioner
w.e.f. 16.06.2004 with all consequential benefits, in
light of the notification no. 4685 dated 25.06.20223
issued by the Finance Department, Bihar which has
not been given to him as yet. And further the
concerned authorities may also be directed to shift
Patna High Court CWJC No.291 of 2026(2) dt.31-01-2026
2/3
the date of 3rd MACP of the petitioner from
05.02.2012 to 16.02.2010 with all consequential
benefits, in light of the resolution no. 7566 dated
14.07.2010 issued by the Finance Department,
Bihar and accordingly all the post retiral benefits
of the petitioner may be refixed and paid to him.
And/or pass other order or orders as your
Lordships may think fit and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case.”
3. Referring to the prayer made in the writ
application, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the even though the petitioner was entitled for the benefit of
2nd ACP with effect from 16.06.2004 in light of the
notification dated 25.06.2003, which is at Annexure-P/1, he
has been deprived of the benefits of 2 nd ACP. He further
submits that despite the representation made by the
petitioner in this regard, no decision has been taken on the
claim of the petitioner as yet. He further confined his prayer
to the extent that the representation of the petitioner
annexed as annexure-P/5 dated 13.10.2025 to the writ
application may be directed to be decided by the concerned
authorities in accordance with law within a reasonable time.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the
respondent does not oppose the submission advanced by the
learned counsel for the petitioner.
Patna High Court CWJC No.291 of 2026(2) dt.31-01-2026
3/3
5. Taking into consideration the submission put-
forth by the learned counsel for the petitioner and taking
into consideration the fact that the representation of the
petitioner is pending consideration before the respondent
authority as yet, this Court deems it fit to dispose of this writ
petition at this stage itself directing the petitioner to file a
fresh representation, raising all the grounds as raised in this
writ application with all supporting documents with respect
to his claim, annexing all the representations filed earlier,
which is at P/5 to the writ application, within a period of
two weeks from today. Upon such representation is filed, the
concerned respondent shall consider the representation of
the petitioner and decide it by passing a reasoned and
speaking order, in accordance with law, preferably within a
period of 45 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the
order of this Court, which shall be communicated to the
petitioner forthwith.
7. Accordingly, with the aforesaid observation and
direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.
(Praveen Kumar, J)
brajesh/-
U
Checking your session…