IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11430 of 2010 1. Banwari Prasad Khetan S/O Late Rameshwar Lal Khetan R/O Muhalla- Rajkumarganj, Near Allahabad Bank, Street No. 1, Darbhanga, P.S.- Darbhanga Town, Distt.- Darbhanga Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary Cum- Commissioner, Water Resources Department, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 2. The Principal Secretary Cum-Commissioner, Water Resources Department, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 3. The Joint Secretary (Management), Water Resources Department, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna ---------------------------------- 2. 18.11.2011 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner superannuated on 31.12.2007 and is desirous to be considered for grant of first and second ACP. He specifically alleges in para 12 & 13 that his juniors have been provided the benefits but he has been arbitrarily discriminated against. He claims the first ACP and second ACP from 9.8.1999 based on his initial date of appointment. The respondents have filed a counter affidavit confining their contention to his claim for second ACP granted from 9.8.2006 but are silent with regard to his claim for lst ACP. The counter affidavit alleges that the petitioner had concealed the punishment in a departmental proceeding dated 20.3.2001 withholding promotion for seven years urging that the writ application should be dismissed on that ground alone. The counter affidavit does not disclose if charge had been framed before 9.8.1999 against the petitioner or not. Conversely, the punishment of censure had to be entered in his confidential roll for the year 1992-1993 looses its efficacy in 1996. Any order for withholding promotion for seven years had to be effective from the date of the punishment and not retrospectively as it would clash consideration of the punishment for censure to be calculated from the year of the charge. It is true that the petitioner did not make adequate disclosure with regard to the punishment but equally the respondents have not assisted by making full disclosure of matters. Rather than to keep the matter pending before the Court asking the parties to supplement their pleadings, when the second ACP has been granted, but in question is the date only as also the issue for first ACP, the matter is remanded to the concerned respondents to pass a reasoned and speaking order on the claim for grant of lst ACP and for also shifting the date of second ACP. Let a reasoned and speaking order be passed within a maximum period of three months from the date of receipt and/or production of a copy of this order before the concerned authority and consequential action, if any, be taken accordingly. The writ application stands disposed. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)