IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2967 of 2010 1. SHASHIKANT PRASAD S/O MANDHATA PRASAD S/O BARI SANGAT, NAWRIAGHAT, PO- JEHABANAD P.SJEHABAD, DISTT- JEHANABAD Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE COLLECTOR CUM DISTRICT MAGISTRATE JEHANABAD 2. COLLECTOR CUM DISTT. MAGISTRATE, JEHANABAD, 3. DISTRICT ESTABLISHMENT DY COLELCTOR, JEHANABAD ----------- 2. 31.8.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner is stated to be a Clerk. He is aggrieved by the order dated 1.12.2009 declining to grant him 1st and 2nd A.C.P. on the ground that he had not cleared the Departmental Accounts Examination. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner was a Clerk and did perform accounts related work. There can be no compulsion for him outside his routine duty to clear the departmental examination in Accounts. Counsel for the State relied upon the Bihar State Employees Conditions of Service Conditions (Assured Career Progression Scheme) Rules, 2003 framed under Article 309 of the Constitution of India. He submits from Clause 4(5) that passing of the Department examination shall be essential even for grant of A.C.P. benefits. Supporting the impugned order, it was submitted that the petitioner not having cleared the Departmental Accounts Examination is not eligible to be considered for grant of A.C.P. 2 The writ petition does not raise any plea that the petitioner as a Clerk did not perform accounts related work and there was no other departmental examination prescribed for grant of A.C.P. benefits to him. In absence of a specific assertion by the petitioner on these aspects, this Court finds it difficult to adjudicate whether passing of the Departmental Accounts Examination in accounts or any other paper was a pre-requisite or not. If the petitioner had raised a specific challenge that there was no requirement to pass a Departmental Accounts Examination or any other examination, the respondents then would perhaps have dealt with it appropriately in their counter affidavit read in context of the grounds mentioned in the impugned order of rejection. If so advised, the petitioner may raise this specific issue before the respondents in light of the impugned order dated 1.12.2009. If he does so, this Court directs the respondents to consider and dispose off the aforesaid representation by a reasoned and speaking order within a maximum period of eight weeks from the date of receipt and/or presentation of a copy of this order. The writ application stands disposed. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)