IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.153 of 2004 RAM BABOO SINGH @ RAM BABU SINGH, residing at Mohalla- Subhash Nagar, Mathia Ziraff, P.S. Chattauni Chowch, District- East Champaran. ……Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Secretary-cum- Agriculture Production Commissioner, Bihar, Patna, New Secretariat, Patna. 3. The joint Secretary to the Government of Bihar, Department of Agriculture, New Secretariat, Bihar, Patna. 4. The Additional Secretary to the Government of Bihar, Department of Agriculture, New Secretariat, Bihar, Patna. 5. The Deputy Secretary to the Government of Bihar, Department of Agriculture, New Secretariat, Bihar, Patna. 6. The Under Secretary to the Government of Bihar, Department of Agriculture, New Secretariat, Bihar, Patna. 7. The Director of Agriculture, Bihar, Patna, Department of Agriculture, Vikash Bhawan,Patna. 8. Principal, Extention Training Centre, Musahari, Muzaffarpur. …. Respodnents. ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Jitendra Nath For Accountant General : Mr. Sanjay Kumar. 6 5.1.2011 The petitioner was an employee of the department of Agriculture, Government of Bihar. There was some disputes with regard to his entitlement of second time bound promotion. He came to this Court and this Court remanded the matter to the department to consider and pass a speaking order. The order was passed by the Agriculture Production Commissioner and communicated to the petitioner under memo no. 4646, dated 18.10.2003 (Annexure 17). The Agriculture Production Commissioner held that the petitioner was entitled to second time bound promotion with effect from 30.8.1990. On such promotion being granted, he was entitled to be placed in the pay scale of Rs. 3000 – 4500/-, which has already been done from 2 the said date. Based upon this, petitioner’s grievance is that when the pay scale was revised subsequent to report of the Fitment Committee which has to be done with effect from 1.1.1996, the material benefits whereof were to accrue with effect from 1.4.1997. The petitioner was entitled to the replacement scale/ revised scale of Rs. 3000 – 4500/- as per the report of the Fitment Committee, which clearly provides that the replacement scale would be Rs. 10,000 - 15,200/-. The petitioner has brought on record the order of the Director of Agriculture dated 28.5.2005 by which the petitioner was granted ACP with effect from 9.8.1999 in the pay scale of Rs. 10,000/- to Rs. 15,200/-. Petitioner states that a reference to the Fitment Committee report would show that this pay scale of Rs. 10,000– 15,200/- is, in fact, the replacement/ revised pay scale of Rs.3000 – 4500/- in which the pay scale of petitioner had already been placed by virtue of his second time bound promotion. His submission, thus, is that instead of granting this pay scale with effect from 9.8.1999, he should have been granted this pay scale with effect from 1.4.1997. In my view, the contention is correct. Once it is admitted that with effect from 1990 when the petitioner became entitled to the second time bound promotion and was in the pay scale of Rs. 3000- 4500/- then upon the report of the Fitment Committee being accepted and no change having been recommended by the Fitment Appellate Committee, the pay scale of the petitioner would be revised 3 equivalent pay scale, which , in fact, is Rs. 10,000 – 15,200/- as accepted by the Government itself was granting ACP to the petitioner. Thus, I hold that with effect from 1.4.1997, the petitioner would be in the pay scale of Rs., 10,000 – 15,200/-. The petitioner would accordingly be entitled to the enhanced pay scale from the said date. The contention of the State that Fitment Appellate Committee recommended no change is correct because he did not change the recommendation of the Fitment Committee, which provided the replaced scale of Rs. 10,000 – 15,200/- .That was maintained by the Fitment Appellate Committee. That does not affect the petitioner, who is claiming only replacement scale of Rs. 10,000 – 15,200/-. The Secretary –cum- Agriculture Production Commissioner, Bihar, Patna is thus directed to see that the revision of pay scale of the petitioner is accordingly carried out and all monitory benefits including in service and post retiral due are paid to the petitioner within six months from the date of production of a copy of this order before him. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition is allowed. Singh ( Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)