JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. Prashant Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Ranjit Sinha, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. Petitioners in the present case are praying for the following reliefs:

"(i) For issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of the letter No. 975 dated 29.08.2018 issued by the Deputy General Manager (Personnel), Bihar State Power Holding Company Ltd. whereby the representation made by the petitioners for grant of officiating allowance for working on the post of Accounts Officer (Look After) has been denied to the petitioners.

(ii) For necessary direction upon the respondent authorities to pay 20% officiating allowance to the Petitioners as the Petitioners while working on the substantive posts of Accountant were posted on a higher post of Accounts Officer in the name of Accounts Officer (Look After) (Petitioner No.2 was given the additional charge of much higher post of Deputy Director of Accounts) but the benefit of 20% officiating allowance has not been paid to the Petitioners, while a similarly situated employee, namely, Sri Ganesh Lal has been paid with 20% officiating allowance in terms of the order passed by this Hon'ble Court in CWJC No. 3687/2013, which has been affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

(iii) For holding that the respondents cannot discriminate between the employees while the similarly situated employee has been paid with 20% officiating allowance, the Petitioners are being deprived of the same benefit on the ground that the case of Ganesh Lal does not create a Precedence.

(iv) For issuance of an alternative direction upon the respondent authorities to pay the salary and allowances attached to the post of Accounts Officer to the Petitioners as the Petitioners holding the post of Accountant were posted to discharge the duty of Accounts Officer (Look After), which is a higher post carrying the higher responsibility. Further, the respondents may be directed to revise the pension and other retiral benefits of the Petitioners.

(v) For any other direction, which your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."

3. Earlier while hearing the writ application, this Court has summarized the facts of the case and the submissions on behalf of the parties in it's order dated 04.02.2021 which reads as under:

"Heard Mr. Prashant Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Ranjit Sinha, learned counsel representing the Bihar State Power (Holding) Company Limited (hereinafter referred to as the 'BSPHCL').

Petitioners in the present case are seeking to challenge the decision communicated by the Deputy General Manager (Personnel), 'BSPHCL' vide letter no.975 dated 29.08.2018 by which the representation of the petitioners for grant of officiating allowance for working on the post of Accounts Officer (Look After) has been denied to the petitioners. The petitioners also seek a direction to the respondent authorities to pay 20% officiating allowance to the petitioners as according to them while working on the substantive post of Accountant, they were posted on a higher post of Accounts Officer in the name of Accounts Officer (Look After). Petitioner no.2 was given the additional charge of much higher post of Deputy Director of Accounts. The common grievance of the petitioners is that while in the case of one of the employees Sri Ganesh Lal the 'BSPHCL' has paid him the officiating allowance in terms of the order passed by this Hon'ble Court in CWJC No.3687/2013, the same has been refused to the petitioners.

Mr. Sinha, learned counsel representing the petitioners submits that so far as petitioner no.1 is concerned, he had officiated during the period 04.05.2010 to 31.03.2013 when he retired from service. Petitioner no.2 was posted as Accounts Officer (Look After) on 26.08.2006, thereafter he was relieved to work as Accounts Officer and he submitted his joining on the post of Accounts Officer on 06.09.2006, while working as Accounts Officer, he wa