IMPORTANT POINT
The court affirmed that passing departmental examinations is not a prerequisite for the grant of ACP/MACP benefits, and recovery of excess payments from retired employees is not permissible without evidence of wrongdoing.

JUDGMENT :

MOHIT KUMAR SHAH, J.

The present writ petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:-

“1. (a) For issuance of writ in the nature of Certiorari, quashing the Order contained in Memo No. 2470 dated 24/04/2023 issued by the Deputy Inspector General, Munger Range, Munger, whereby and whereunder, after superannuation of petitioner, 1st ACP, 2nd MACP and 3rd MACP, which was granted on 09.08.1999, 12.03.2009 and 12.03.2019, respectively, has been withdrawn/cancelled and it has been stated that petitioner would be entitled to grant of first ACP on 08.02.2022, the day he cleared his supplementary examination of Basic Training.

(b) For issuance of writ in the nature of Certiorari, quashing the Jamui Jiladesh No. 508/2023 issued by Superintendent of Police, Jamui, whereby and whereunder in compliance of the Order contained in Memo No. 2470 dated 24/04/2023 issued by the Deputy Inspector General, Munger Range, Munger, after superannuation of petitioner, 1st ACP, 2nd MACP and 3rd MACP, which was granted on 09.08.1999, 12.03.2009 and 12.03.2019, respectively, has been withdrawn/cancelled/rescinded and it has been stated that petitioner would be entitled to grant of first ACP on 08.02.2022, the day he cleared his supplementary examination of Basic training.

(c) For issuance of writ in the nature of Certiorari, quashing the date of confirmation of service of petitioner from 08.02.2022, and thereafter fixing the date of confirmation of petitioner as 06.03.1983.

(d) For holding and declaring that action of respondent authorities in canceling the 1st ACP, 2nd MACP and 3rd MACP, which was granted on 09.08.1999, 12.03.2009 and 12.03.2019, respectively, is arbitrary, unconscionable and illegal and therefor same deserves to be set aside.

(e) For holding and declaring that no recovery would be effected pursuant to aforesaid impugned orders against petitioner as he is not responsible for late passing of the supplementary training examination.”

2. The brief facts of the case, according to the petitioner, are that the petitioner was appointed as General Constable in Rohtas District Police Force on 06.03.1983, whereafter he was transferred to Jamui District Force as Driver Constable. It is stated that the petitioner had appeared at the basic training examination on 26.11.1984, however, he had failed in the law paper but then he had subsequently cleared the exam. Nonetheless, the petitioner was granted the benefits of 1st A.C.P. on 09.08.1999, 2nd MACP on 12.03.2009 and 3rd MACP on 12.03.2019 by the competent authority. Thereafter, the Superintendent of Police, Jamui vide Memo dated 22.07.2021 had sent the petitioner and others, who had not cleared the basic training examination, for appearing in the supplementary training examination, to be held at Primary School, Nath Nagar, wherein the petitioner had appeared and was subsequently declared to have passed the same on 08.2.2022. The petitioner had then superannuated on 31.01.2023.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that after retirement, the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Munger Range, by the impugned order dated 24.04.2023 has cancelled/withdrawn the benefits of 1st ACP, 2nd MACP and 3rd MACP granted to the petitioner, as aforesaid, on the ground that the petitioner would be entitled to grant of 1st ACP with effect from 08.02.2022, the day on which he had cleared the supplementary exam of basic training. The Superintendent of Police, Jamui had then issued the consequential order dated 28.04.2023, which has also been challenged in the present proceedings. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no rule/regulation exists in the respondent police department, which stipulates that passing of the basic training examination is a condition precedent for grant of the benefits of ACP/MACP. In any view of the matter, it is submitted that law in this regard is no longer res integra, inasmuch as a learned Division Bench of this Court in the case of the State of Bihar