JUDGMENT :

Deepak Roshan, J.

Heard learned counsel for the parties through V.C.

2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner praying therein for quashing and setting aside the order as contained in Memo No.130 dated 05.02.2013, passed under the signature of respondent no.4 (Annexure-11) whereby the claim of the petitioner in terms of order dated 18.12.2012 passed in W.P.(S) No.5196 of 2009 by this Court has been rejected and also for quashing the order contained in Memo No.2199 dated 06.09.2010 (Annexure-5), whereby the benefit of Assured Career Progression (hereinafter referred as ACP) granted to the petitioner with effect from 19.09.1990 has been cancelled and shifted to 24.07.2003 and further order to recover the amounts in lieu of A.C.P granted to the petitioner in spite of the fact that the said ACP was approved by the Divisional Commissioner, Hazaribagh.

3. The facts relevant for disposal of the instant writ application are that the petitioner was initially appointed in the month of December, 1971 and superannuated from service on 31.07.2009. In the light of recommendation of the Finance Department, the scale of the petitioner has been fixed in the pay scale of Rs.9300-34,600/- with effect from 01.01.2006 and also provided increments with effect from 01.07.2006, 01.07.2007 and 01.07.2008 respectively vide order dated 20.03.2009 (Annexure-1). The petitioner has also been provided the last increment with effect from 01.07.2009.

The grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of the aforesaid decision of Finance Department, the last increment which was sanctioned and approved vide Annexure-2, was not provided to the petitioner which was due on 01.07.2009. As such, the petitioner filed a detailed representation for providing the entire retiral benefits. Finally, the petitioner preferred a writ application being W.P.(S) No.5196 of 2009 praying for a direction upon the respondents to pay entire retiral benefits, however during pendency of the said writ application, an order under Memo No.2199 dated 06.09.2010 has been issued; whereby the first time bound promotion granted to the petitioner with effect from 19.09.1990 and the First ACP provided with effect from 09.08.1999 has been cancelled on the ground of non-passing of accounts examination. Consequently, the benefit of first ACP was granted from 24.07.2003 and further it was also directed to recover the amount in lieu of excess payment made by virtue of first time bound promotion.

During pendency of the aforesaid writ application, the pension of the petitioner was also fixed in the pay scale of Rs.11925/- which is of five years before and much before the pre-revised scale. Further, vide order dated 28.05.2010, the respondents have paid the group insurance amount.

The petitioner assailed the impugned order dated 06.09.2010 in the earlier writ application and this Court vide its order dated 18.12.2012 quashed the impugned order; however, the Respondents were given liberty to issue Notice to the petitioner and pass a fresh order.

4. Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had earlier moved before this Court being W.P.(S) No.5196 of 2009 challenging the impugned order dated 06.09.2010, whereby the claim of the petitioner has been rejected and the benefits of First ACP; which was granted to the petitioner with effect from 19.09.1990, was shifted to 24.07.2003 and the excess amount already paid was directed to be recovered. The said writ application was disposed of vide order dated 18.12.2012 by quashing the impugned order dated 06.09.2010, however a liberty was granted to the respondents to issue fresh show-cause notice to the petitioner and pass a fresh order.

Learned counsel strenuously contented that when the impugned order was quashed by this Court in W.P.(S) No.5196/09 then the respondent authority instead of passing the new order/fresh order has revived the earlier impugned order as if the respondents were si