IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No 1186 of 2010 1. MANORMA KUMARI SINHA D/O SHRI RAMESHWAR SINGH R/O MOH WEST SHASTRI NAGAR, P.O. & P.S.RAMPUR, DISTT-GAYA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY , HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR,PATNA 2. THE DIRECTOR , PRIMARY EDUCATION, HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR,PATNA 3. THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION MAGADH DIVISION AT GAYA 4. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE GAYA 5. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION GAYA 6. THE PRINCIPAL , DUNKAN MADHYA VIDYALAYA JAIL PRESS , SHASTRI NAGAR , SIKARIYA MOR, GAYA ----------- 2 24.06.2010 The petitioner was appointed to the post of Primary Teacher in Middle School, Asni at Bodh Gaya on 17.09.1994. From time to time, the pay scale of the petitioner was revised not because of any promotional benefit but as a consequence of her being entitled to revised pay by reason of pay revision or by reason of her passing Teachers’ Training and other examinations. As per the Assured Career Progression Scheme of the Government, she having not received any promotional benefit or benefit equivalent to promotional benefit within 12 years of her appointment, she claims ACP on completion of 12 years of service. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that apparently the same is being denied to her on the ground that she was recruited as an untrained Teacher and then she was granted Matric Trained Teacher’s Scale. Her pay scale was enhanced because of pay revision and grant of replacement grade pay. Thus, she is being denied ACP. Prima facie, the stand of the State does not appear to be correct. Granting replacement pay or enhancement of pay as a consequence of pay revision or enhancing pay scale because of her clearing Teachers’ Training Course are not promotions and cannot be 2 treated as such. It is better that the petitioner makes a detailed representation before District Superintendent of Education, Gaya pointing out these aspects of the matter alongwith copy of order of this Court who would consider the same and pass appropriate order. The order must be a speaking order and if it grants ACP, the same shall be with all consequential benefits from the time it was due inasmuch as if the petitioner is entitled to ACP, she must be granted the benefits forthwith and if she is not entitled to it, she must be communicated detailed reasons for the same forthwith. Such an order must be passed within one month of representation being filed by the petitioner alongwith copy of order of this Court. This disposes of the writ petition. M.E.H./ (Navaniti Prasad Singh)