JUDGMENT

Prabhat Kumar Singh, J. - At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners prays for and is allowed to make correction in paragraph 1(III) of the prayer portion.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State.

3. Writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:-

(I) For issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the order dated 19.2.2020 issued under the signature of the respondent no.5 and contained in his memo no. 187 dated 19.2.2020, whereby and whereunder he has been pleased to modify the date for grant of benefits of financial progression to the petitioners and has also directed for recovery on the ground that earlier the petitioners were granted the benefits of financial progression with effect from a date when they had not cleared their accounts examination.

(II) For issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the order dated 12.5.2020 issued under the signature of the respondent no.7 and contained in his letter no. 644 dated 12.5.2020 whereby and whereunder the respondent no.7 has been pleased to direct for withholding the salary of writ petitioners until their fixation of salary in terms of the order passed by the respondent no.5 and contained in his letter no. 187 dated 19.2.2020.

(III) For a declaration that if no Departmental Examination was conducted by the Nodal Department, i.e., Water Resources Department for the Clerks of the Works Department of the State from 1996 to 2004, the respondents cannot deny the benefit of financial progression to the petitioners on the ground that the petitioners had not passed the accounts examination when they were otherwise entitled for such grant in view of the financial progression scheme.

(IV) For issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of Mandamus, commanding and directing the respondent authorities for grant of benefits of first ACP with effect from the date when the petitioners had put 12 years of their services after their first joining on the ground that if they had not cleared their departmental examination for no fault on their party, they cannot be denied the benefits of the first ACP only on the ground that they had not cleared their accounts examination.

(V) For issuance of any other appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions for which the writ petitioners are found entitled under the facts and circumstances of the case.

Petitioners have also filed Interlocutory Application No.1 of 2020 seeking some additional reliefs made therein bringing on record photo stat copies of the representation dated 10.6.2020 (Annexure 9), Memo No. 879 dated 29.6.2020 (Annexure 10) and Memo No. 880 dated 29.6.2020 (Annexure 11), which have been issued by the respondent Executive Engineer directing for recovery of the excess amount allegedly drawn by petitioner no.2 and petitioner no.3 respectively, because of illegal grant of ACP benefits before the due date.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that initially all the four petitioners were appointed as Lower Division Clerk (Correspondence Clerk) in the Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna in 1994, 1992, 1990 & 1990 respectively. In the year, 2003, the State Government vide Notification No. 4785 dated 25.6.2003 came out with a new promotion rule, namely, 'Bihar State Employees Service Condition (Assured Career Progression Scheme) Rules, 2003 (herein after referred to as 'the ACP Rules, 2003'), which was made effective from 9.8.1999. A copy of ACP Rules, 2003 is contained in Annexure P-1 to the writ petition. As per the ACP Rules, 2003, every Government servant of Group B, C and D, who have not been granted any financial progression within 12 years of their appointment were held entitled for grant of benefits of the first ACP on completion of 12 years of services and the benefits of second ACP on completion of 24 years of service. Said ACP Rules, 2003 was modified by 'Modified Assured Career Progressi