Patna High Court
Vinay KumarversusThe State of Bihar,
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The writ petition is disposed of, with the petitioner directed to approach the CDPO for corrective measures and no relief granted.
Summary
The petitioner, a retired employee, filed a writ petition seeking fixation of his pension, arrears, gratuity and payment of leave encashment based on Assured Career Progression (ACP) and Modified ACP (MACP) benefits, and to set aside orders denying his first ACP. The State argued that a 2019 communication alleging misrepresentation was merely a clarification and no recovery had been made. The Court found that the communication was only a clarification, the excess amount of Rs.9,262 had already been deposited, and no recovery action was pending. It directed the petitioner to approach the Child Development Project Officer (CDPO) for any corrective measures and noted that any unauthorized recovery should be refunded. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of without granting the reliefs sought.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to fixation of pension and arrears based on ACP/MACP benefits.
- Whether the gratuity and leave encashment should be revised and paid.
- Whether the orders denying the first ACP are illegal and should be set aside.
- Whether the State's communication constitutes misrepresentation requiring recovery from the petitioner.
Subjects
- pension fixation
- Assured Career Progression
- Modified ACP
- gratuity
- leave encashment
- civil writ jurisdiction
- retirement benefits
- administrative law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6526 of 2021
======================================================
Vinay Kumar son of Late Rajnandan Sharma resident of Village - Datmai,
P.S. - Dhanarua, District- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar, through the Principal Secretary, Social Welfare
Department, Main Secretariat, Patna.
2. Director, Directorate of Integrated Child Development Services, Indra
Bhawan, Ram Charitra Singh Path, Boring Canal, Road, Patna.
3. District Magistrate, Patna.
4. District Programme Officer, Integrated Child Development Services, Patna.
5. Child Development Project Officer, Masaurhi, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kishore Kumar Thakur, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Kumari Amrita ( GP-3 )
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
24 10-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State.
2. The writ petition has been filed for the following
reliefs :-
(i) To make fixation of pension of the
petitioner on the basis of pay made admissible to
him consequent upon the ACP and MACP granted
to him.
(ii) Further prayer is to start making
payment of pension so fixed in favour of the
petitioner, along with the arrears thereof.
(iii) For a further direction to the
respondents to make payment of difference amount
Patna High Court CWJC No.6526 of 2021(24) dt.10-04-2026
2/5
of leave encashment in terms of new pay fixation
which also has not been paid to the petitioner even
after more than three years of his retirement.
(iv) The petitioner further prays that the
Gratuity of the petitioner be also revised in terms
in the last pay supposed to be drawn by him in the
grade pay of Rs. 4200/- which was made
admissible to him on grant of 3rd MACP to him
and the balance amount of Gratuity be paid to the
petitioner.
(v) Setting aside the order contained in
Memo No.2615 dated 20.06.2018 (Annexure-P/6)
issued under the signature of respondent director
ICDS as well as the consequential order contained
in Memo No.1651 dated 26.09.2018 (Annexure-
P/1) issued under the signature of respondent
District Magistrate, Patna, whereby the petitioner
has been illegally denied benefit of 1st ACP with
due date of 09.08.1999.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits
that the grievances of the petitioner has been redressed,
however, by referring to Letter No.178 dated 18.03.2019,
appended with the writ petition as Annexure-D of the counter
affidavit filed on behalf of respondent Nos.3, 4 and 6, submits
that without there being any misrepresentation for grant of
ACP/MACP, still through communication made by the Child
Patna High Court CWJC No.6526 of 2021(24) dt.10-04-2026
3/5
Development Project Officer (for brevity ‘CDPO’), this
petitioner has been shown to have fetched such benefits under
the scheme by misrepresentation, but from the stand so taken by
the respondents in the counter affidavit, it appears that that
benefit under ACP has been granted to the petitioner strictly
under the provisions of Assured Career Progression scheme and
as also under modified Assured Career Progression scheme, as
per his entitlement.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State
submits that this communication was made in the year 2019 but
till date, no recovery has been made and it is merely an
apprehension of the petitioner which is unfounded, as there is no
intention of the authorities to make any recovery from the
petitioner.
5. Considering the stand of the parties, this Court is
fully convinced that since there has been no recovery made till
date, as such, the Letter No.178 dated 18.03.2019, was merely
an communication, which stands clarified in view of the specific
stand taken by the State and insofar as the excess amount to the
tune of Rs.9262/- is concerned, the same has already been
deposited but the same has not been countersigned by the
respondent CDPO, because of which excess amount though
Patna High Court CWJC No.6526 of 2021(24) dt.10-04-2026
4/5
been deposited by the petitioner, the liability as against the
petitioner still stands, for which the petitioner apprehends that at
some point of time, such liability would be fastened and
coercive steps may be taken.
6. To such submission, the learned counsel for the
State submits that the petitioner may be directed to approach
the CDPO, who would take the corrective measures to give
quietus to such dispute, in the light of deposit having been made
by this petitioner vide Annexure-P-7 and P-7/A.
7. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner
further points out that in case the recovery has been made from
the pensioner pensionary benefits then the petitioner would
make an appropriate representation and by taking necessary
decision if that amount has unauthorizedly been recovered, then
the same shall be refunded.
8. Petitioner is further restored with the liberty that
if the stand of the State authorities are found to be otherwise
then the petitioner shall apprise the competent authority with
regard to such disputed issues with all supportive materials
and on finding substance in the grievances raised, necessary
decision shall be taken, and same shall be redressed
expeditiously.
Patna High Court CWJC No.6526 of 2021(24) dt.10-04-2026
5/5
9. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
sharun/-
U
Checking your session…