IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6892 of 2006 1. BABAN PRASAD SINGH SON OF LATE RAM LAGAN SINGH RESIDENT OF SURYA VIHAR COLONY, PHASE I, PLOT NO. I, ASHIANA NAGAR, SHASTRI NAGAR, PATNA. 2. NISAR AHMAD SON OF LATE SHEIKH ABDUL RESIDENT OF NEWTOLA, PHULWARISHARIF, PATNA. 3. ABU SAYEED SON OF LATE LAL MOHAMMAD RESIDENCE IN THE HOUSE OF BADRUDDIN AHMAD, KURJI, P.O. SADAKAT ASHRAM, P.S. DIGHA, PATNA. 4. MUKUL KUMAR SON OF SRI UMESH NANDAN KISHORE, RESIDENT OF NAYA TOLA, SARISTABAD, P.O. G.P.O. GARDANIBAGH, PATNA. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH ITS SECRETARY CUM COMMISSIONER, RURAL ENGINEERING ORGANISATION, GRAMIN VIKASH DEPARTMENT, BIHAR, PATNA. 2. COMMISSIONER-CUM-SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, BIHAR, PATNA. 3. ENGINEER IN CHIEF, RURAL ENGINEERING ORGANISATION, GRAMIN VIKASH DEPARTMENT, BIHAR, PATNA. 4. CHIEF ENGINEER, RURAL ENGINEERING ORGANISATION, GRAMIN VIKASH DEPARTMENT, BIHAR, PATNA. 5. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, RURAL ENGINEERING ORGANISATION, ADVANCE PLANNING CIRCLE, BIHAR, PATNA. 6. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, RURAL ENGINEERING ORGANISATION, SOIL INVESTIGATION DIVISON, BIHAR, PATNA. ----------- 3 10/11/2010 There are two kinds of relief which have been prayed for in this writ application. One is for grant of promotion under the Assured Career Progression Scheme - 2 - (A.C.P.) after completion of 24 years of service and the other is for an appropriate replacement scale of Rs.4500- 7000 to the petitioners instead of Rs.4000-6000. In the counter affidavit which has been filed on behalf of the respondents it is categorically stated that the case of the two petitioners were considered by the departmental promotion committee and it was found that the petitioners have not passed their departmental examination in Accounts at any point of time. Non passing of the examination comes in the way of the petitioners’ claim for promotion under the A. C.P. scheme. Copy of the scheme has also been annexed with the counter affidavit which supports such a stand. So far as the claim of the petitioners for grant of pay scale of Rs.4500-7000 is concerned, it is clearly stated that such a pay scale is available to the Head Clerk and not to the correspondence clerk as would be evident from the notification issued by the State in this regard. Benefit of pay scale cannot be given to the petitioners merely on the asking on a wrong premise. Be that as it may, this writ application is dismissed as no case for grant of any of the two benefits - 3 - is made out in light of what has been stated by the State in the counter affidavit with supporting materials in this regard. This writ application is dismissed. AMIN/ (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)