IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17101 of 2011 Harinandan Yadav S/O Late Gorakh Yadav Resident Of Village-Bhelahi, Ward No. 10, Police Station-Supaul, District- Supaul, Bihar-----------------------------Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Deputy Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. The Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Birpur, District-Supaul. 5. The Superintending Engineer, Eastern Embankment Circle, Saharsa. 6. The Executive Engineer, Eastern Embankment Circle, Supaul-------------------------------------------Respondents ---------------------------------- For the Petitioner: Mr. S.C. Jha-3, Advocate For the Respondents: A. C. G. P -11 -------------------------- 2. 17.11.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties. Petitioner is a retired Jeep driver who was working in the Eastern Embankment Division of Supaul. While was in service he was granted first and second ACP on the basis of prevalent notification at the relevant time. The State of Bihar, department of Personnel & Administrative Reforms, as it then was issued a notification dated 30.11.2005 laying down the service conditions and pay scale of the drivers by virtue of which they would be entitled to other benefits including the revised scale under ACP Scheme. Petitioner has been repeatedly approaching the higher authority for such a revision but inaction on their part has forced him to approach the High Court for direction upon the authority to decide his claim. The relevant notification is annexures-1 and 2 to the writ petition and the applications filed before the Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department are annexure-3 series. Some of these 2 applications were filed as far back as in 2006 and thereafter. After having perused annexure-1 and 2 prima facie there is an occasion for the respondent authority to consider the claim of the petitioner for revision coupled with the fact that there is failure on the part of the concerned authority specially the Chief Engineer to take a decision on this count. In view of above respondent no.4, i.e. Chief Engineer Water Resources Department, Birpur at Supaul is directed that on production of a copy of fresh application as proof of earlier filing will take cognizance of the same and decide the matter within a period of three months from tendering of such an application with a copy of this order. It goes without saying that if the claim of the petitioner is found in consonance with the rules and notification as contained in annexures- 1 and 2 the consequence will flow and if not the reason thereof may be communicated to petitioner within the same time frame. This writ petition is disposed of with the above direction. RPS (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)