IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8118 of 2006 DR.MANORANJAN PRASAD SINGH Versus BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD& ORS. ----------- 6. 25.09.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the Respondents. The controversy in this case revolves around interpretation of the following passage from the instruction of the Board bearing memo no. 276/Patna dated 24.10.2000: “In the cases of employees who had been drawing maximum of the existing scale for more than a year or have drawn one or more stagnation increment as on 1.1.1996 next increment in the revised scale shall be allowed on 1.1.96. No stagnation increment granted after1.1.96 will be taken into consideration for purposes of pay fixation.” Counter affidavit of the Respondents states very clearly that the petitioner was at the maximum stage of pay scale of Rs. 3500/- in the pre-revised scale of Rs.1760-3500/-. In terms of the Board’s instruction he was entitled for one increment in the pre-revised scale, which has been given. The petitioner does not dispute it. It is the further contention of the Board that in pursuance of grant of revised pay scale of Rs. 5530-11020/- he has been given one more increment as on 1.1.1996. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this is the bone of contention. Monetary benefit of such increment and addition of the same to his pay scale with consequential benefits has not been - 2 - made available. This Court on the facts of the case is satisfied that as per the policy decision the petitioner was entitled to one increment in the pre- revised scale and then first increment in the revised scale was also to be given to him, which was to be added to his pay scale. Whether the increment has been given at both stages i.e. pre-revised scale and the revised scale as on 1.1.1996 is a matter of accounting. The petitioner is, therefore, granted liberty to appear before Respondent no. 5 along with a copy of the present order. That Respondent no. 5 shall give a personal hearing to the petitioner to satisfy him of the grant of increment actually made to him or is due. In the event that Respondent no. 5 arrives at the decision of grant of increment to the petitioner both in the pre-revised and revised scale, he shall pass a reasoned and speaking order in presence of the petitioner himself. Let this exercise be completed within a period of one month from the date that the petitioner appears before Respondent no. 5. The writ application stands disposed. AKS/ (Navin Sinha, J.)