Rajendra Menon, J.

1. This writ-appeal has been filed by the respondents-appellants herein under Clause 10 of Letters Patent of the Patna High Court against the judgment of a learned Single Judge dated 3.2.2016 passed in CWJC No. 3687 of 2013.

2. The factual matrix of the case lies in a narrow compass. The writ petitioner-respondent herein filed CWJC No. 3687 of 2013 for a direction to the respondents-appellants herein to grant promotion to the post of Accounts Officer under the Scheduled Caste category in view of the fact that the writ petitioner was stagnating on the post of Accountant since 1983.

3. The writ petitioner-respondent has pleaded in the writ petition that he was posted as Accounts Officer since 2002 and he has continuously performed the duty and responsibility of the Accounts Officer. He had stated that he was going to superannuate on 31st of January, 2014, he is stagnating on the post of Accountant for nearly two decades. Thus, the writ petitioner's claim was for grant of promotion on account of continuous officiation on the post of Accounts Officer from 2002.

4. The writ-petitioner-respondent has placed on record Annexure-2 to indicate that by office order contained in memo no. 7154 dated 4.10.2002, the General Manager-cum-Chief Engineer, Central Electric Supply Area appointed and posted the writ petitioner-respondent until further orders to discharge the duty and responsibility of Accounts Officer. The writ-petitioner submitted his joining on 5th October, 2002 in response to the letter contained in memo no. 7154 dated 4.10.2002. Vide notification contained in Annexure-3, the writ petitioner was allowed to look after the works of Accounts Officer and posted as Accounts Officer, Electrical Circle Ara until further orders. Again vide annexure-4 the writ petitioner was transferred and posted as Accounts Officer in Electrical Supply Division, Nawadah.

5. On the basis of the aforesaid pleading the writ-petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondents-appellants to grant him promotion considering his continuous officiation as Accounts Officer for more than a decade as the writ petitioner was discharging the whole responsibility of Accounts Officer like any other regular Accounts Officer and as such he claimed that on the ground of "equal wages for equal work" he was entitled to the pay scale of Accounts Officer. He also claimed that he is entitled to grant of 1st, 2nd and 3rd A.C.Ps in view of the fact that he has remained in the pay scale of Accountant for 30 years without any promotion.

6. On behalf of the Bihar State Power Holding Company, a counter affidavit was filed wherein stand was taken that the writ-petitioner has not passed Lekha Praveen Pariksha and as such he could not be promoted to the post of Accounts Officer. There is no denial in the counter affidavit that the writ petitioner was not posted as Accounts Officer to discharge the duty and responsibility of the post of Accounts Officer and the fact that the writ petitioner continued on the said post for more than a decade.

7. The Writ Court after hearing the parties and on perusal of the pleadings of the parties particularly the undisputed fact that the writ petitioner was asked to perform the duty of Accounts Officer and he continued on the said post up-to 31.1.2014, held out that the writ petitioner is entitled to the benefit of 20% officiating allowance for discharging higher responsibility.

8. The Writ Court in para 10 of its judgment has noted the judgment of two Division Benches of the Patna High Court in the case of Prafulla Ranjan Shrivastava v. The State of Bihar & Ors.: 2008(3) PLJR 144 and in the case of Dr. Nitya Gopal Bandyopathyay v. The State of Bihar & Ors.:2008(1) PLJR 245 and a judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Secretary-cum-Chief Engineer, Chandigarh v. Hari Om Sharma & Ors: (1998) 5 SCC 87. In those judgments the Division Bench of this Court as well as the Apex Court considering continuous officiation and discharge