IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4849 of 2007 SURENDRA KANT SHARMA, Son of Late Nandkumar Sharma, Basic Health Worker, Primary Health Centre Sarairanjan, Police Station Sarairanjan, District Samastipur. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Secretary (Health Services), Department of Health, New Secretariat, Patna. 2. The Director-in-Chief (Health Services) Department of Health, New Secretariat, Patna. 3. The Regional Deputy Director (Health Services) Darbhanga Division, Darbhanga. 4. The Civil Surgeon Cum Chief Medical Officer, Samastipur. 5. Shree Pavan Kumar Shrivastava, Son of name not known, posted as Clerk in the office of the Civil Surgeon Cum Chief Medical Officer, Samastipur. ----------- 2 23.09.2010 Heard counsel for the parties. Prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows:- “That, this is an application for issuance of an appropriate writ/ writs/ direction/ directions directing the respondents to grant and pay the benefit of first A.C.P. with effect from 09.08.99 and the benefits of Second A.C.P. with effect from 04.09.2002 i.e. the date of completion of continuous 24 years services to the petitioner with all consequential benefits with interest as due to negligence of the respondent no. 4 and 5 the aforesaid benefits has not been paid to him, whereas similarly situated and even juniors to the petitioner has been provided the said benefits.” Counsel for the petitioner would submit that when State Government has taken a policy decision with regard to grant of first and second A.C.P. the same cannot be denied to the petitioner only on account of slackness and negligence on the part of the respondents in considering the case of the petitioner. Ordinarily, such a clear case could have been easily adjudicated by this Court had the respondents carefully filed their 2 counter affidavit, but as per usual habit of the authorities of the Health Department no counter affidavit has been filed in this case though the writ application was filed on 13.4.2007 and that too after service of two copies of the writ application. In absence of counter affidavit it is difficult to ascertain the reasons for non consideration of grant of first and second ACP to the petitioner. In that view of the matter, this Court would direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of first and second ACP from the due date and pass an order in this regard within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. In the event, such ACP of the petitioner is denied the authorities will be required to spell out reasons for the same, but if the same is allowed the petitioner will also be entitled for the financial benefit as is extended to others. With the aforementioned observations and directions this application is disposed of. Abhay Kumar ( Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)