IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4286 of 2009 Laleshwar Jha Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors ----------- 2. 25.07.2011 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State. The claim in the writ application is for grant if first and second ACP. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the counter affidavit raises failure to pass the Departmental Accounts Examination in all the three papers as a justification for not granting ACP. It quotes Rule 157(3)(J)(Kha) of the Board Miscellaneous Rules in justification of the same. The Counter affidavit itself acknowledges that the writ petitioner has passed the first and second papers. Placing reliance on those very Rules it is submitted that Clause 157 (3) specifically provides that there shall be two papers for eligibility only of three hours each. The question of passing any non existent third paper therefore does not arise. The counter affidavit in its present form more particularly with regard to the statements on behalf of the petitioner from the Board Miscellaneous Rules relied upon in the counter affidavit, leaves the Court satisfied that a conclusive adjudication on the issue in the nature of the stand taken by the respondents is not possible by the Court. Let the Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department at Darbhanga examine the claim of the petitioner in accordance with law and decide the matter by a reasoned and speaking order preferably within a maximum period of three months from the date of receipt and/or presentation of a copy of this order before him. It is expected that if the respondents find justification in the claim or in any part of the claim, necessary consequential orders shall be passed simultaneously keeping in mind that the petitioner is a superannuated employee. The writ application stands disposed. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)