IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.679 of 2006 JHALAN PRASAD Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 3 29.9.2010 Heard learned counsel for the parties. There is clear evidence to show that the petitioner had been granted substantive promotion from Class IV to Class III post which was the post of correspondence clerk. Initial appointment of the petitioner was on the post of peon. Since the benefit of promotion had already accrued in favour of the petitioner obviously by mistaken decision the petitioner also came to be given the benefit of A.C.P. on completion of 12 years of service. The circular and the scheme with regard to A.C.P. has also been annexed with the counter affidavit. The benefit of A.C.P. will accrue to an employee only in the background that he had not been given any promotion during the prescribed period of service. In the first case the first benefit of ACP will accrue after 12 years of service and second benefit of ACP after completion of 24 years of service. It is evident from the proceeding and the service book annexed with the counter affidavit, which has not been rebutted that the petitioner was initially appointed as a peon then became a Daftari and thereafter came to be promoted on the post of correspondence clerk. Obviously the grant of ACP benefit could not be applied in the case of the petitioner at the relevant time and it was a wrong which was sought to be undone in terms - 2 - of annexure-4. Such a decision has not been limited to the petitioner but has been taken with regard to all such similarly situated employees. In view of the same the petitioner has no case. This writ application has not merit and it is dismissed. RPS (Ajay Kumar Tripathi,J.)