Patna High Court
Santwana BanerjeeversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The Court did not award the benefits directly but ordered the petitioner to file a detailed representation and directed the respondent authority to adjudicate the claim, effectively disposing of the writ petition.
Summary
Santwana Banerjee, appointed as an Assistant Teacher in the Bihar Sub‑ordinate Education Service (Junior Grade) in 1978, sought the benefits of the 1st and 2nd ACP that should have accrued when her service was merged into Grade‑2 on 20‑07‑1985. The merger was delayed because a CBI enquiry was pending against her and other teachers. The enquiry was later concluded in her favour and the Division Bench of the Patna High Court had already set aside the enquiry in Kamini Kumari v. State of Bihar (LPA No. 1219 of 2023). Despite this, the petitioner claimed that the benefits had not been granted from the date of entitlement. The Court directed the petitioner to file a detailed representation within four weeks and ordered the Director of Secondary Education to adjudicate the claim within eight weeks, taking into account the absence of any pending enquiry. The petition was thereafter disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to the 1st and 2nd ACP benefits from the date of service merger despite the earlier CBI enquiry.
- Whether the court can direct the administrative authority to adjudicate the claim after the enquiry has been cleared.
Subjects
- service merger
- CBI enquiry
- ACP benefits
- public service
- writ petition
- administrative direction
- Patna High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.310 of 2026
======================================================
Santwana Banerjee W/o Soura Bikash Kanjilal, Village/ Mohalla- House 116,
Gaur Galaxy, Plot No.-5, Near Shopprix Mall, Sector-5, Vaishali, I.E.
Sahibabad, P.S.- Kaushambi, District- Gaziabad, State- Utter Pradesh, Pin
Code- 201010.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Additional Chief Secretary, Education Dept., Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Director, Secondary Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Purushottam Narayan Mishra
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Standing Counsel (24)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 12-01-2026 The instant writ petition has been filed for the
following relief;
“1. That this application is being filed for
direction upon respondents of granting benefits
of 1st and 2nd ACP at appropriate time and for
grant of subsequent relief of granting all the
consequential benefits including monetary
benefit.”
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher in the Bihar Sub-
ordinate Education Service in Junior grade vide Memo No. 1162
dated 09.12.1978 issued under the signature of the Director,
Patna High Court CWJC No.310 of 2026(2) dt.12-01-2026
2/4
Secondary Education, Bihar and later on, his services under the
Bihar Sub-ordinate Education Service Junior Grade got merged
in service grade-2 with effect from 20.07.1985 but, the
petitioner’s service was not merged with the said grade-2 with
effect from the same date, as there was C.B.I. enquiry pending
against the petitioner and as also against some other similarly
situated teachers but, later on, the respondents had given the
benefits from the year 1990. It is further submitted that the
initiation of the CBI enquiry and the report, so submitted, has
already been interfered by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this
Court vide order dated 27.02.2024 passed in LPA No. 1219 of
2023 (Kamini Kumari Vs. State of Bihar & Ors.), and as such,
the case of the petitioner may be considered on its own merit.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that the C.B.I. enquiry
has already been concluded in his favour and all such similarly
situated persons including the petitioner are said to have been
exonerated but, for no obvious reason, the benefits, for which
the petitioner is entitled under the progression scheme, has not
been accorded from the date, when the benefit is actually
applicable in the case of the petitioner. It is further submitted
that though the benefits of 1st ACP has been extended but, not
from the date when it is actually applicable.
Patna High Court CWJC No.310 of 2026(2) dt.12-01-2026
3/4
4. At this stage, learned counsel for the State submits
that the petitioner may be directed to file a detailed
representation, giving detailed history of her services supported
with material documents for allowing the authorities to
adjudicate her claim.
5. To this, learned counsel for the petitioner
undertakes to file detailed representation, appending the
necessary documents for ventilating the grievances within a
period of four weeks from today.
6. It is expected that on filing of such representation,
the respondent no.3 shall adjudicate the same within a period of
eight weeks from the date of filing of such representation. While
adjudicating the grievance of the petitioner, the respondent
concerned shall take into consideration the fact that there is no
pending enquiry against the petitioner and the Hon’ble Division
Bench has already watered down such enquiry and if the
petitioner’s entitlement is found from the date of its
applicability, all such benefits shall be extended in favour of the
petitioner within the time period so allowed for adjudication and
the same shall also be communicated to the petitioner through
valid mode.
7. With the aforesaid observations and direction, the
Patna High Court CWJC No.310 of 2026(2) dt.12-01-2026
4/4
writ petition stands disposed of.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
rishi/-
U
Checking your session…