JUDGMENT :

DEEPAK ROSHAN, J.

1. The instant writ application has been preferred by the Petitioner for the following reliefs:

i) For quashing the office order no. 9 and memo no. 74 dated10.01.2018 (Annexure-3) passed by Divisional Forest Officer, Social Forestry Division, Simdega as well as quash the office order no. 42 and memo no. 1596 dated 09.12.2017 (Annexure-3/1).

ii) For directing the concern respondents to provide the 1st ACP to the petitioner as a scale structure of Rs. 4000-6000 and grade pay of Rs. 2800/- from the date of 13.07..2000 as well as 2nd ACP as a scale structure of 6500-10500/grade pay of Rs. 4200/- from the date of 13.07.2012.

2. The grievance of the Petitioner is that since he is matriculate and due to non-passing departmental examination, the benefit of 1st ACP has been delayed and 2nd ACP has been denied by the Respondents.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner draws attention of this Court towards Annexure-2 which is the order passed in the case of similarly situated employees, wherein the Coordinate Bench of this Court has granted the benefit of ACP to all the employees ignoring the ground for passing of the departmental examination.

4. Learned counsel for the State relies upon the counter affidavit and submits that the case of the Petitioner cannot be equated by common order passed by this Court, which is annexed as Annexure-2 of the writ petition; however, he could not dispute the fact that the issue has now been well settled that for taking the benefit under ACP/MACP Scheme the departmental examination is not required.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the documents available on record and also the averments made in the respective affidavits, it appears that the grievance of the Petitioner with regard to ACP benefit has been set at rest by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Amresh Kumar Sinha & Ors. Versus The State of Bihar & Ors., 2023 SCC OnLine SC 496 wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has dealt this issue in detail and came to the conclusion that ACP Scheme was imposed on the recommendation of 5th C.P.C and its object has been reiterated in several judgments as one to relieve the frustration on account of stagnation and it has also been held that both ACP & MACP Schemes are devised with the object of ensuring that the employees who are unable to avail of adequate promotional opportunities, get some reliefs in the form of financial benefits. For brevity, Paras- 9 to 19 in the case of Amresh Kumar Sinha (Supra) are extracted hereinbelow:

“9. The Bihar Accounts Service Rules, 2000 as notified on 28th March, 2000 vide Rules 17 and 20 read with Schedule I thereof provides for recruitment by way of promotion. The aforesaid Rule 17, inter alia, provides that for promotion on the basis of grade of service, candidates must possess qualifications mentioned in Schedule I which, inter alia, provides that for promotion to Bihar Accounts Service, the minimum educational qualification shall be graduation.

10. At the same time Bihar State Employees Service Condition (Assured Career Progression Scheme) Rules, 2003 vide sub-Rule (5) of Rule 4 lays down that if the rules prescribe passing of the departmental examination or any qualification for promotion that shall also be an essential condition for sanction of benefit under the scheme. In other words, possession of essential qualification prescribed under the rules is necessary for grant of benefit under the scheme, i.e., ACP.

11. It is in view of the above rules, the contention of the State is that until and unless the Accountant Clerks possess the minimum educational qualifications of graduation, they are not entitled to promotion in the grade of Bihar Accounts Service that is the Accounts Officer.

12. It may be worth noting that the ACP scheme was enforced on the recommendation of the Fifth Central Pay Commission in context with Group C and D employees and it provided monetary benefit to the employees on completion of 12 years and 24 ye