IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC NO.5335 OF 2007 RABINDRA NATH SHUKLA,S/O LATE SHIVDUTTA PRASAD SHUKLA, R/O RIKABGANJ, KHANCHIYA ROAD, P.O + PS. TEKARI, DISTRICT GAYA. …………………PETITIONER. VERSUS 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2.COMMISSIONER CUM SECRETARY, HEALTH DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3.CIVIL SURGEON, GAYA. 4.ADDITIONAL CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER, GAYA. 5.INCHARGE, PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE, TEKARI GAYA. 6.ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, BIHAR, BIRCHAND PATEL PATH, PATNA. ………………………RESPONDENTS. ----------- 02/ 29.08.2011 Heard counsel for the parties. Having regard to the prayer made in this writ application which is confined only to payment of arrears of salary from 01.12.1995 to 13.02.2002 as also for grant of benefit of ACP, this Court in the light of the facts explained in the counter affidavit will have no difficulty in holding that the petitioner will be entitled for payment of his salary on the post of Clerk from 01.12.1995 to 02.08.1996, inasmuch as, the order reverting the petitioner from the post of Clerk to his original post of Vaccinator dated 01.12.1995 was kept in abeyance under 2 an order of this Court dated 03.04.1996 in C.W.J.C No. 307 of 1996 till the disposal of the representation to be filed by the petitioner against the order of his reversion and such representation was disposed of only on 02.08.1996. Thus for the interregnum period from 01.12.1995 to 02.08.1996, the petitioner shall be entitled for full payment of salary, which if not been paid to him yet must be paid within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The consideration however, for payment of salary for the period after 02.08.1996 i.e 03.08.1996 to 01.03.2002 shall be entirely different, inasmuch as, the petitioner did not join the allotted post of Vaccinator and therefore, after disposal of his representation rejecting his claim for the post of Clerk on 2.8.1996, if he had not joined and worked at the allotted place of his posting, he cannot claim payment of salary on the settled principles of 'no work no pay'. The 3 prayer of the petitioner for payment of arrears of salary for the aforesaid period i.e. 03.08.1996 to 01.03.2002 is, accordingly, rejected. The grievance of the petitioner as with regard to grant of ACP has to be still decided by the Authority and, inasmuch as, in paragraph no. 32 of the counter affidavit, the respondents themselves have stated as follows:- “That in reply to para 18 of the writ petition it is stated that it is wrong to say that regular promotion, time bound promotion as well as benefit of ACP has been denied to the petitioner. The grievance about said matter have been removed recently, it he is entitle for the same he will get all benefit, which he is legally entitled for.” In that view of the matter, this Court would direct the competent Authority to examine and decide the claim of the petitioner for grant of ACP strictly in accordance with law and if the petitioner is found entitled for grant of such ACP and consequential financial benefit, the same must be extended to him as given to his other counter parts. This exercise however 4 must be completed by the competent Authority within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this application is disposed of. Ranjan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)