IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12789 of 2011 Punya Nand Mishra S/O Late Narsing Mishra R/O Mohalla- Kabilpur, Laheriasarai, P.S.- Laheriasarai, Distt.- Darbhanga Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Dehri, Rohtas. 4. The Superintending Engineer, Flood Control Circle, Buxar. 5. The Executive Engineer, Sone Canal Division, Buxar ----------- 02. 28.9.2011 Petitioner is working as a Circle Officer at present in Sone Canal Division. He initially entered service as Moharir and earned promotion to the post of Tahsildar, which was renamed as Irrigation Revenue Inspector. According to the petitioner, looking at the length of service which he has rendered under the respondents and taking the new scheme notified by the State Government for grant of benefit of ACP, he is entitled to such grant right from the year 1999 itself. However, despite such scheme being in place, the claim of the petitioner is not being considered or decided by the concerned respondent, specially respondent No.3 who is said to be Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Dehri at Rohtas. Since it is a case of non-decision and not a case of rejection, therefore, no adjudication obviously is required to be made by the Court. However, there is surely a failure on the part of the concerned respondent to decide the claim of the petitioner since petitioner has been patiently waiting in this regard right from the year 2009 as would be evident from Annexure-3 series. 2 Without expressing any opinion on the merit of the claim of the petitioner, respondent no.3 i.e. Chief Engineer is directed to verify the service records of the petitioner, his entitlement in terms of the ACP scheme and take a decision within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order. If there is any legal impediment in the way of considering the claim of the petitioner, he will be communicated thereof within the same time. It goes without saying that if entitlement of the petitioner is found to be in order as per his claim, necessary authorization will have to be made and benefit will accrue to him in the time frame indicated above. Writ stands disposed of with above direction. rkp ( Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)