JUDGMENT :

1. The matter has been taken up through Video Conferencing with the consent of learned counsel for the parties. They have no complaint whatsoever regarding audio/visual quality.

I.A. No. 5180 of 2020

2. This application has been filed for condoning the delay of about six months, which has occurred in preferring the present appeal. However, the office has reported that in view of the order dated 23.03.2020 and 06.05.2020 passed in suo-moto Writ Civil No. 03 of 2020 by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the appeal is to be treated to have been filed within time.

3. Ordered accordingly.

4. Thus, there will be no requirement of condoning the delay, because the appeal has to be treated to have filed within time.

5. This Interlocutory Application, accordingly, stands disposed of.

6. However, this order would be subject to any objection raised in future by any of the party or the aggrieved person.

L.P.A. No. 299 of 2020

7. The instant intra-court appeal preferred under Clause-10 of Letters Patent is directed against the order/judgment dated 13.02.2020 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P. (S) No. 424 of 2018, by which, the direction sought for by the writ petitioner, upon the respondents to consider and grant him benefits under 2nd Assured Career Progression Scheme (ACP) and Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme (MACP) from the due date with all consequential benefits, has been refused to be granted by dismissing the writ petition.

8. The brief facts of the case, as per the pleading made in the writ petition, required to be enumerated, are as hereunder.

9. The writ petitioner was appointed as a Clerk on 28.07.1983 in the Project Girls High School, Tenughat. He was confirmed to the said post on 30.01.1986. He was superannuated from service on attaining the age of 60 years i.e. on 30.06.2013. The grievance of the writ petitioner was that in spite of several representations for grant of benefits under the Assured Career Progression Scheme as also under the Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme, the same was not granted, therefore, the writ petition being W.P. (S) No. 424 of 2018 has been filed for seeking the aforesaid direction.

The writ petitioner took the ground that although, he was not passed the departmental examination but since he has completed 50 years of age, as such, was entitled for exemption and even without passing the departmental examination, he ought to have been granted benefit of 2nd Assured Career Progression Scheme as also the Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme.

The respondent has taken the plea before the writ Court that, the writ petitioner since has not passed the departmental examination, which is mandatorily to be passed, therefore, the financial benefit by way of granting 2nd Assured Career Progression Scheme and Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme have not been granted.

10. So far as the ground taken on behalf of the writ petitioner that he has already attained the age of 50 years, therefore, was entitled for exemption from passing departmental examination, submission has been made, in rebuttal to the same, that merely because one or the other employees have completed the age of 50 years, does not ipso-facto entitled such employee for grant of such monetary benefit, rather, the benefit of exemption is only to be given if any application is being filed on behalf of one or the other employee making reference therein that due to not conducting departmental examination, such employee could not be able to appear therein, and therefore, on the ground of laches on the part of the State authority, the financial benefit under the aforesaid scheme cannot be denied.

Moreover, the exemption can be sought for under the Government Circular, if up to the age of 50 years and if such examination could not have been conducted, then only in that circumstances, the Government is required to pass an order exempting such employee for passing in the departmental examination for getting the benefit of