Patna High Court
BiharversusNand Ji Singh
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
Holding
The appellate court held that there was no perversity in the Single Judge’s order and dismissed the appeal, directing the State to reconsider the petitioner’s representation afresh.
Summary
The petitioner, a retired Deputy Superintendent of Police, sought a third ACP/MACP financial benefit after his Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) declined his request on the ground that his Annual Confidential Report (ACR) did not meet the required grading benchmark. The Single Judge set aside the DPC's decision, holding that the Committee had mistakenly treated the financial upgradation as a promotion, citing the Supreme Court’s decision in Amresh Kumar Singh v. State of Bihar. The State appealed, arguing that the petitioner failed to satisfy the 36‑month ‘Very Good/Excellent’ ACR criterion for the third MACP. The High Court examined the submissions and concluded that the Single Judge’s order was not perverse and that the matter must be remitted to the State to consider the petitioner’s representation afresh in accordance with law. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed and the State was directed to decide the representation within eight weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether the Departmental Promotion Committee erred in treating the financial upgradation as a promotion under law.
- Whether the petitioner satisfied the statutory ACR grading requirement for the third ACP/MACP.
- Whether the Single Judge’s order setting aside the DPC’s decision was perverse and liable to be overturned.
Subjects
- Departmental Promotion Committee
- Annual Confidential Report
- ACP
- MACP
- Writ jurisdiction
- Promotion criteria
- Retirement benefits
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.1335 of 2023
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16977 of 2018
======================================================
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Home Department,
Patna, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Finance, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Director General of Police, Patna, Bihar.
4. The Additional Director General of Vigilance Investigation Bureau, Patna.
... ... Appellants
Versus
1. Nand Ji Singh, Son of Late Ram Kewal Singh, Resident of B-184, Police
Colony, Anishabad, Police Station- Gardanibagh, District- Patna.
2. The Accountant General (A&E), Bihar, Patna.
... ... Respondent
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellants : Mr. Prabhat Kumar, AC to GA-11
For the Respondent :
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH)
6 08-01-2026 The present intra Court appeal has been preferred
against the order dated 28.08.2023, passed in CWJC No.16977
of 2018, whereby the learned Single Judge has been pleased to
set aside the decision of the Departmental Promotion Committee
and has remitted back the matter to the authorities to consider
the case of respondent-petitioner afresh in accordance with law.
2. The brief facts giving rise to present appeal are that
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1335 of 2023(6) dt.08-01-2026
2/5
the respondent-petitioner was initially appointed in the year
1983 on the post of Labour Inspector. He was further appointed
on post of Sub-Inspector in the year 1985. He was promoted to
the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police in August, 2010.
Subsequently, he retired from the post of Deputy Superintendent
on 31.12.2013. In the year 2018, for granting 3rd MACP to the
respondent-petitioner, the Home Department, Government of
Bihar requested the Annual Confidential Report (for brevity
“ACR”) of the respondent-petitioner. The same was received
and was examined by the Departmental Promotion Committee
of the Home Department. The appellants after going through the
ACR and records, did not recommend for granting of 3 rd ACP to
the respondent-petitioner, as he did not qualify the benchmark
regarding grading in his ACRs.
3. Against the decision of the Departmental Promotion
Committee, the respondent-petitioner preferred CWJC
No.16977 of 2018, which was allowed, and the following
directions were issued by the learned Single Judge. The relevant
portion of the impugned judgment is reproduced as under:-
“5. Considering the fact that the
Departmental Promotion Committee, in the
misconceived manner, has considered the
financial upgradation which is required to be
paid to the petitioner on account of 3rd
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1335 of 2023(6) dt.08-01-2026
3/5
ACP/MACP on account of the stagnation on
the post, has considered the same to be
promotion, in spite of the fact that the law in
this regard has already been settled and
accordingly clarified by the Apex Court in
number of reporters including the recent
decision of the Apex Court in case of Amresh
Kumar Singh vs. State of Bihar reported in
(2023) SCC OnLine SC 496.
6. The decision of the Departmental
Promotion Committee, so far as, the
petitioner is concerned, is held to be not in
accordance with law and the same is set
aside so far as the petitioner is concerned.
7. The petitioner, if so advised, may file a
detailed representation before the
Respondent No. 2- the Director General of
Police, Patna, Bihar, who is directed to
consider the representation of the petitioner
in accordance with law considering the fact
that the petitioner has not come for any
promotion after his retirement rather he has
claimed in the present writ petition for
granting him financial benefit as a result of
stagnation in salary after granting him
benefit of 2nd ACP and 3rd MACP in
accordance with law.”
4. The learned counsel for the appellant-State submits
that the respondent did not meet the qualifying criteria as
required in the Annual Confidential Report for granting of 3 rd
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1335 of 2023(6) dt.08-01-2026
4/5
MACP. The service reports of the respondent shows ‘Very
Good/Excellent’ in the record for less than 36 months. In order
to be considered for granting of 3rd MACP, his record should
show ‘Very Good/Excellent’ for 36 months or more. Thus, the
order of the learned Singe Judge is fit to be set aside.
5. The learned counsel for the respondent submits that
the learned Single Judge had rightly allowed the writ petition
after going through submissions and materials on record, and
therefore, the judgment of the learned Single Judge requires no
interference.
6. Upon perusal of impugned judgment, materials on
record and considering the submissions made on behalf of the
appellant, it is apparent that the matter has been remitted back to
the appellant-State to consider the representation of the
respondents afresh. As such, it is clear that the appellants are at
a liberty to consider and decide the representation of the
respondent-petitioner in accordance with law.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and the discussions
made herein, we are of the considered opinion that there is no
perversity in the order of the learned Single Judge.
8. The appellants are, therefore, directed to look into
the representation of the respondent-petitioner and pass an
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1335 of 2023(6) dt.08-01-2026
5/5
appropriate order in accordance with law within a period of
eight weeks from date of receipt or production of a copy of this
order. However, it is made clear that the observations made by
the learned Single Judge shall not come in way, while deciding
the representation afresh by the competent authorities in the
matter of entitlement of petitioner regarding ACP/MACP.
9. In view of the aforesaid, the present appeal stands
disposed of.
10. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed
of.
(Sudhir Singh, J.)
(Praveen Kumar, J.)
Gaurav Kumar/-
U
Checking your session…