IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. LPA No.112 of 2009. Decided on: 11th May, 2010. State of H.P. & ors. ….. Appellants. Versus Smt. Kaushalya Devi. …… Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.B. Misra, Judge. For the Appellants: Mr. R.K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. Advocate General. For the Respondents : Mr. Ajay Sharma, Advocate. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The State is aggrieved by the judgment dated 24.2.2009 in CWP (T) No.2244 of 2008. The issue pertains to the claim made by the petitioner for grant of proficiency step up and promotion. There were other ancillary grievances as well. The writ petition was allowed on the following lines, as follows: “Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to grant selection grade to the husband of the petitioner with effect from 15.11.1978 and also to consider his case for promotion to the post of Forest Ranger from 16.3.1985 and further to grant him one additional increment by way of proficiency step up with effect from 15.11.1986. These mandatory directions shall be complied with by the respondents within a period of four weeks from today. The respondents are directed to release the monetary benefits to the petitioner with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. 2 The petitioner is also held entitled to the costs quantified at Rs.3,000/-.” 2. Learned Senior Additional Advocate General contends that by the grant of the relief, as above, the petitioner would be enjoying double benefits. It is also submitted that having been given a normal promotion in the normal channel, the writ petitioner is not entitled for any benefit under the Assured Career Promotion Scheme. It would be profitable to extract ground (D) taken in the appeal since the whole dispute is based mainly on that ground only, which reads as follows: “That in compliance of impugned judgment dated 24.2.2009, the husband of the applicant has been promoted as Forest Ranger in the pay scale of Rs.700-1200 w.e.f. 16.3.1985 i.e. the date from which his counterparts/juniors were promoted. The official had granted selection grade w.e.f. 1.2.1981 and also promoted to the rank of Forest Ranger w.e.f. 16.3.1985, as such grant of one additional increment by way of proficiency step-up under ‘ACP’ Scheme was not admissible to him vide letter non. Fin.(c) B(7)6/83 dated 14.6.89 (Annexure P/3).” 3. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner, however, contends that all the juniors to the writ petitioner have been granted the benefit of ACP Scheme and the same has been denied to the writ petitioner only owing to the pendency of the disciplinary proceedings at the relevant time and the said fact having been admitted in the reply furnished in the writ petition, the appellants cannot now turn around and deny the eligible benefits to the petitioner. The question is whether the writ petitioner is actually entitled to the benefit under the ACP Scheme in the facts, referred 3 to above and whether in the similar circumstances any junior to the petitioner had been granted the same benefits. 4. Having heard the learned counsel on both sides, we feel that the issue can be given a quietus if a direction is issued to the appellants to verify as to whether any junior to the petitioner had been granted the benefit of one increment under the ACP Scheme and who is similarly placed as the writ petitioner and if so, the writ petitioner shall also be extended the same benefits. In any case the writ petitioner shall not be put in a position as to draw a lesser salary than the junior. The needful exercise in that regard shall be done within a period of one month from the date of the production of a copy of this judgment and to that extent required the judgment of the learned Single Judge will stand modified. The appeal is disposed of, so also the pending applications. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 11th May, 2010 ( Justice R.B. Misra), (tr) Judge.