IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14147 of 2009 1. RAMAKANT SAU @ RAMAKANT SAH S/O LATE SHIVMANGAL SAH, RESIDENT OF MOH- GAING QUWATER HIGH COURT PANI TANKI, PATNA-1:--Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH ITS SECRETARY CUM COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT, BIHAR AT PATNA 2. THE COMMISSIONER PATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, PATNA 3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER PATNA WATER BOARD 4. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER PATNA WATER BOARD, PATNA:--Respondents. ====== 02. 29.10.2009. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. Petitioner is a Pipe Line Mechanic serving in the Patna Water Board. He has filed this writ application for a direction to the State-respondents to consider his case for payment of the arrears of salary in the revised scale as per the 6th pay revision recommendation contained in Letter No. 630 dated 16.12.2004 (Annexure-1)with effect from 1.1.1996 as also to consider his case for grant of Assured Career Progression in terms of the scheme contained in Memo No. 2455 dated 18.10.2008, 25.6.2003 with effect from 9.8.1999. 3. For the aforesaid two reliefs he has filed a representation which is dated 22.12.2008 and is contained in Annexure-2 to this application . It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the aforesaid representation has not yet been considered and disposed of and the authority should consider the same at the earliest in the light of the orders of this Court dated 8.5.2009 passed in C.W.J.C.No. 7610 of 2009 and analogous matter. 4. Counsel for the Patna Municipal Corporation refutes the aforesaid prayer as according to him the Corporation does not have enough fund to grant the benefit of the revised scale in terms of the 6th - 2 - pay revision recommendation as also to consider the case of the employees for grant of Assured Career Progression on account of paucity of fund with the Corporation as it is difficult even to meet its day-to-day expenses and appreciating such paucity of fund, the Corporation has assailed the order dated 8.5.2009 by filing L.P.A. and the L.P.A. is still pending consideration. 5. In rejoinder counsel for the petitioner submitted that L.P.A. may have been preferred against the order dated 8.5.2009 but as no stay has been obtained by the Corporation, the Corporation is duty bound to obey the direction of this Court contained in order dated 8.5.2009. 6. Having heard counsel for the parties, I direct the Chief Municipal Commissioner, Patna Municipal Corporation, Patna to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 22.12.2008, Annexure-2 in accordance with law as early as possible, in any case within a period of two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 7. This writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. P.K.P. (V.N.Sinha, J.)