IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4200 of 2007 Umesh Prasad Singh, Son of Late Ram Ujagar Singh, Resident of Village- Ratauli, P.O.- Binodpur, P.S.- Begusarai Mufassil, District Begusarai, at present posted as Correspondence Clerk, Rural Engineering Organisation, Works Division, Rosra, District Samastipur …. …. Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Secretary, Rural Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 3. The Engineer-in-Chief, Rural Engineering Organisation, Rural Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Bisheshwaraiya Bhawan, Patna 4. The Chief Engineer, Rural Engineering Organisation No.2, Rural Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Bisheshwaraiya Bhawan, Patna 5. The Superintending Engineer, Rural Engineering Organisation, Works Circle, Darbhanga 6. The Executive Engineer, Rural Engineering Organisation, Works Division, Begusarai, District Begusarai 7. The Executive Engineer, Rural Engineering Organisation, Works Division, Rosra, District Samastipur … … Respondents ----------- For the Petitioner : M/s Shyama Prasad Mukherjee, Sr. Advocate & Shanti Pratap, Advocate For the State :M/s Maheshwar Dhar Dwivedi, S.C.23 & Shatrughna Pandey, A.C. to S.C.23 02/ 30.06.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. Petitioner at the relevant time served in the Works Division of the Rural Engineering Organisation, Samastipur. He is aggrieved by the office order bearing Memo No. 538 dated 10.5.2003, Annexure-1 passed by the Superintending Engineer, Rural Engineering 2 Organisation, Works Circle, Darbhanga, whereudner time bound promotion allowed to the petitioner and others has been cancelled on the ground that he failed to pass Departmental Accounts Examination. He is also aggrieved by the office order bearing Memo No. 415 dated 6.5.2005, Annexure-2 whereunder the monetary benefit earned pursuant to grant of time bound promotion has been directed to be recovered. Earlier, petitioner was allowed time bound promotion with effect from 6.8.1986 under office order bearing Memo No. 1779 dated 23.6.1988, Annexure-3. 3. From the writ petition, it appears that petitioner appeared in the Departmental Accounts Examination conducted in the year 2002, but could only pass 1st and 3rd paper. Appreciating the fact that petitioner could not pass the Departmental Accounts Examination, the competent authority under Memo bearing No. 1288 dated 13.11.2006, Annexure-D to the counter affidavit has granted him exemption from passing the Departmental Accounts Examination with effect from the date of issue of the said order i.e. 13.11.2006, Annexure-D to the 3 counter affidavit. 4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that in the light of the departmental instruction bearing Letter No. 4674 dated 15.5.1992, exemption from passing the Departmental Accounts Examination can be allowed with effect from the date employee attained the age of 50 years provided the employee could not pass the said examination. In the light of the instruction contained in departmental letter dated 15.5.1992, the competent authority should have allowed the petitioner exemption from passing the Departmental Accounts Examination not with effect from the date of order i.e. 13.11.2006, but from the date he attained the age of 50 years i.e. 31.12.1999. 5. Counsel for the State, on the other hand, submitted that grant of exemption is the discretion of the competent authority and in the instant case, petitioner has been allowed exemption with effect from the date of issue of order bearing Memo No. 1288 dated 13.11.2006, Annexure-D to the counter affidavit, as such, his case for grant of time bound promotion can be considered only with effect from 13.11.2006 and not earlier. 4 6. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the relevant departmental instruction, I am of the view that once discretion is vested in the competent authority to consider the case of the Government employee for grant of exemption from passing the Departmental Accounts Examination, the authority has to consider the exemption in a manner which subserves the public interest as also the interest of the Government servant. The State Government having considered the matter, decided to grant exemption to those Government employees who having attained the age of 50 years could not pass the Departmental Accounts Examination. In such view of the matter, while considering the case of the petitioner, the competent authority, in my opinion, should have taken liberal view in the matter and ought to have granted the petitioner exemption from passing the Departmental Accounts Examination from the date he attained the age of 50 years. 7. Accordingly, I modify the exemption order bearing Memo No. 1288 dated 13.11.2006, Annexure-D to the counter affidavit and direct that petitioner be granted 5 exemption from appearing in the Departmental Accounts Examination with effect from the date he attained the age of 50 years. 8. Let the competent authority i.e. Superintending Engineer, Respondent no.5 consider the case of the petitioner for grant of second time bound promotion with effect from the date petitioner attained the age of 50 years i.e. 31.12.1999 as early as possible, in any case within three months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. 9. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. Arjun/ ( V. N. Sinha, J.)