IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.858 of 2009 DHARMA NATH MISHRA, SON OF LATE BRIJ NATH MISHRA, RESIDENT OF C-101, OFFICER HOSTEL, BAILEY ROAD, POLICE STATION – KOTWALI, DISTRICT – PATNA. ………… Petitioner / Appellant. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, MAIN SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 3. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CABINET SECRETARIAT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, MAIN SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 4. THE SECRETARY, CHIEF MINISTER SECRETARIAT, GOVERNFMENT OF BIHAR, 4-DESHRATNA MARG, PATNA. 5. THE JOINT SECRETARY, CHIEF MINISTER SECRETARIAT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, 4-DESHRATNA MARG, PATNA. ………… Respondents / Respondents. For the Appellant :- Mr. Sanjay Singh, Advocate. Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Mishra, Advocate. Mr. Anand Priyadarshi, Advocate. For the Respondent :- Government Advocate No. 14. ----------- 07 01.04.2010 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that appellant had preferred writ petition hearing CWJC No. 6658 of 2009 with a grievance that the State of Bihar and its concerned authorities were not sanctioning and paying him as per scheme of A.C.P. The writ Court, according to the learned counsel for the appellant, fell into an error in holding that after being brought into government service by way of deputation, the appellant was never appointed as a government servant by the competent authority. He has placed reliance upon several documents including service book of the appellant as prepared by the respondent themselves in which the very first entry on 2 page 2 is to the effect that the appellant has been appointed on the ex-cadre post of Confidential Assistant with effect from the date of his joining i.e. 21.01.1983 in the pay scale of Rs.880- 1510/- by dint of office order no. 68 dated 05.08.1983 issued from the Secretariat of the Chief Minister. According to the learned counsel for the appellant the service record and order of confirmation of the appellant by Annexure – 4 to the writ petition dated 18th December, 1989 leave no manner of doubt that although the appellant was initially brought into government service on deputation from Lalit Narayan Mishra Institute but subsequently he was appointed and absorbed in the government service without any dispute on this issue. We find merit in the aforesaid submissions advanced on behalf of the appellant. In spite of opportunity given to learned counsel for the State, no dispute could be raised in respect of documents relied upon by the appellant. Hence, we have no option but to reverse the finding of the learned writ Court that the appellant never became a government servant. The next issue is what relief the appellant should be granted in respect of his grievance relating to non grant of A.C.P. In course of submissions, it is evident that appellant cannot get benefits of time bound promotion as well as ACP at 3 a time. Hence, the aforesaid grievance of the appellant is remitted to the concerned authority for a proper decision in accordance with law within a period of three months from today. It goes without saying that for grant of benefits either under the time bound scheme or now the scheme for A.C.P the authority shall keep in mind the proper scale, to which the appellant may be entitled in law. After the decision is taken with regard to his claim for time bound promotion or A.C.P, it is expected that if any monetary benefits are found payable on account of such decision, the same shall be paid to him without any further delay preferably within a period of one month. The appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent. Kundan (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (Gopal Prasad, J.)