IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3103 of 2007 BINOD KUMAR son of Late Bhagwan Sharma, resident of Gyan Bhawan, Idgah Road, P.O. Gulzarbagh, P.S. Alamganj, District Patna. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through Secretary Cum Commissioner, Department of Health, Bihar, Patna. 2. The Under Secretary, Department of Health, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Drug Controller, Government of Bihar, Patna. ----------- 2 16.09.2010 Heard Mr. Rashid Izhar, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows:- “Issuance of writ or writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondents to grant both time bound promotions or A.C.P. (whatever it may be) to the petitioner which was not granted during the entire 29 years of service period of the petitioner due to laches on part of respondents even when the petitioner retired from service of the respondents on 31.12.2004.” At the very out set Mr. Izhar, learned counsel for the petitioner, with regard to the aforementioned prayer would frankly concede that as the date of appointment of the petitioner on the post of Drug Inspector was 2.10.1975 he would not be entitled for grant of 2nd time bound promotion as the period of 25 years will be completed only on 2.1.2002 and the scheme of time bound promotion was abolished w.e.f. 1.1.1996. He would, however, submit that even that as the petitioner had retired from service only w.e.f. 1.1.2005, he having continued in service up to 21.12.2004, would be entitled for grant of benefit of 1st and 2nd A.C.P. In this context he has invited 2 attention of this Court to the statement made in the counter affidavit, which as a matter fact, does not clarify as to whether grant of 1st and 2nd A.C.P. to the petitioner was considered. In the opinion of this Court, if the petitioner had continued up to 21.12.2004 he would be entitled for consideration of his case for grant of both the A.C.P. In this regard statement made in paragraph no.7 of the counter affidavit reading as follows:- “That it is humbly stated that so far A.C.P. is concerned, the matter of admissible pay for the first and second A.C.P. for the post of Drug Inspector (Pay scale 6500-10500 was under consideration of Finance Department, govt. of Bihar, Patna. The Finance department govt. of Bihar Patna has finally clarified that since there is no provisions of higher post in the cadre rule of Drug Inspector as such pay scale of Rs.7500-12000 will be admissible for the first A.C.P. and pay scale of Rs.8000-13,500 will be admissible for the second A.C.P. Accordingly action in general including the petitioner is being taken in this regard.” would not be sufficient, inasmuch as, such counter affidavit was sworn on 22.4.2008 and today counsel for the State is not in a position to inform this Court as to what steps has been taken after the Finance Department had resolved the controversy as with regard to the pay scale on the post of Drug Inspector. That being so, this Court would direct the respondent no.3 to consider the grievance of the petitioner as with regard to grant of 1st and 2nd A.C.P. from the due date. Such decision by the respondents including the Drug Controller, respondent no.3, must be taken within a period of six months from the date of 3 receipt/production of a copy of this order and any financial benefit arising out of such decision also must be extended to the petitioner within the period of next two months. With the aforementioned observations and directions this application is disposed of. Abhay Kumar ( Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)