By Court: The petitioner has approached this Court seeking following directions:

“(i) For issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondents to give benefits as Assured Carrier Promotion (A.C.P.) from retrospective i.e. 09.08.1999 on completion of 24 years of Service as per the Rules and Guidelines of the State Government.

(ii) For giving all consequential benefits from the cut of dated i.e. 9.8.1999 as he was eligible for the same from 1.3.1999.

(iii) For issuance of any other appropriate Writ/Order or Direction in the facts and circumstances of the case and in accordance with law.”

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents on record.

3. The brief facts of the case are that, the petitioner was appointed as Sergeant in the police department on 17.01.1974. He completed 24 years of service on 17.01.1998. The A.C.P. Scheme was made effective from 09.08.1999. It appears that due to the incident which occurred on 01.03.1996, the petitioner was awarded punishment of one black mark on 17.01.1998 and therefore, the petitioner was denied benefit under the A.C.P. Scheme. He represented before the authorities however, by order dated 5/7.10.2004 the claim of the petitioner was rejected.

4. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent no. 4 justifying the decision to reject the claim of the petitioner for grant of benefit under the A.C.P. Scheme.

5. A counter-affidavit has also been filed on behalf of the respondent no. 2 stating as under:

18.” That it is stated that the case of the petitioner for grant of ACP was considered three times, but on all three occasions he was found unfit by the D.G. Board on account of his unsatisfactory service records as the petitioner earned punishments during various posting as Sgt. Major as follows:

Ref. Of Dep. Proceeding Date of incident relating to the charge Order Passed

Deoghar Distt. Deptt. Proceeding No. 10/92 Date not disclosed in Service Book One black mark vide D.O. No. 997/95

Rly. Katihar Depttl. Proceeding No. 74/96 01/03/96 One black mark vide D.O. No. 996/98

Palamau Distt. Depptl. Proceeding No. 12/01 20.08.2000 One black mark vide D.O. No. 278/02

Palamau Distt. Depptl. Proceeding No. 47/01 17.02.2001 One black mark vide D.O. 3919/01

Palamau Distt. Depttl. Proceeding No. 48/01 24.02.2001 One black mark vide D.O. No. 3920/01

Similarly his ACRs particularly for the period 01.04.1995 to 15.05.1996, 25.11.2000 to 31.03.2001, 01.04.2002 to 27.12.2002 have not been found satisfactory.

19. That it is stated that from the facts mentioned above it would be evident that the petitioner during his various postings as Sgt. Major did earn major punishment at regular intervals and his ACRs not satisfactory and it was in the wake of above facts and the subjective appreciation there of, that the Board found his unfit for grant of ACP.”

6. Dr. S.N. Pathak, the learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner has contended that by order dated 24.07.2012 the matter was referred to the Division Bench of this Court for deciding the effect of punishment in terms of Rule 726 (III) of the Jharkhand Police Manual and by order dated 12.12.2013 the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court has held that the operation of the order of punishment would be from the date of penalty order in case of the officers in the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police and above. The learned Senior counsel has thus contended that in view of the aforesaid finding returned by the Division Bench which has now been implemented by the State of Jharkhand, since the petitioner who was serving in the rank of Sergeant which would be equivalent to the post of Sub-inspector and who was punished with respect to an incident which occurred on 01.03.1996, would be entitled for grant of benefit under the A.C.P. Scheme with effect from 01.03.1999 as the period of 3 years from the date of incident would expire on 01.03.1999. Relying on the recommendation of the Superintendent of Police,