IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3886 of 2009 Bhesdhari Lal Das Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors ----------- 2. 22.07.2011 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State. The petitioner is stated to have superannuated on 31.1.2000 as Head Clerk in the pay scale of Rs. 4500-7500/-. Fixation of pay scale is primarily the prerogative of the employer. It is not for Courts to interfere lightly with pay scale matters. The petitioner represented for refixation of his pay scale with effect from 1.1.1996 in the scale of Rs. 5000-15—8000/-. It has been granted to the petitioner on 16.8.2005 retrospectively with effect from 1.1.1996.The petitioner pursued the matter in this application for grtant of actual monetary benefits thereof. Subsequently, during the pendency of the writ application, the respondents have issued an order dated 19.5.2010 opining that the revised pay scale was admissible from 1.1.1996 under instruction dated 8.2.1999. All other promotions stood abolished from 1.1.1996. In pursuance thereto all earlier promotions given to the petitioner earlier have been cancelled on 26.3.2010 and benefit of ACP given. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the promotion given to him as Head Clerk was by a fiction of the consideration done and the eligibility considered much prior to 1.1.1996. Merely because the formal order has been passed thereafter shall not tantamount to consideration of a claim after the scheme had been abolished in 2003, the petitioner having retired before introduction of the ACP Scheme. That aspect need not be gone into at this stage as Counsel for the State is unable to demonstrate from the counter affidavit that before issuance of the order dated 19.5.2010 withdrawing the promotion and the pay scale given by order dated 16.8.2005, any show cause notice was given to the petitioner setting out grounds on which it was proposed to be recalled. Undoubtedly the letter dated 19.5.2010 visits the petitioner with adverse civil consequence. The Court at this stage is concerned with the decision making process itself and not the ultimate decision with regard to entitlement of pay scale. The stand dated 19.5.2010 is therefore held unsustainable in its present form. If the respondents propose to deprive the petitioner of the benefit accrued to him by order dated 16.8.2005 they are obliged to give him a show cause notice setting out grounds, consider his reply and then pass appropriate orders. The order dated 19.5.2010 is set aside. All other grounds are left open for the petitioner to urge at the appropriate time before the appropriate forum. The writ application stands allowed. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)