ACP grievances are to be pursued through Bihar’s Government Servant Grievance Redressal Rules, 2019.

The petitioner, Santosh Kumar, an Assistant Engineer in the Bihar Rural Works Department, sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to grant him the benefit of the first Assured Career Progression (“A.C.P.”) with effect from 1 January 2016.

He alleged that Assistant Engineers junior to him had already been granted the same benefit by Memo No. 5304 dated 26 July 2019, and contended that, as on 1 January 2016, no departmental proceeding was pending against him and he was not under suspension.

The petitioner had also submitted a representation dated 31 January 2022.

During the hearing, the Court noted that the grievance concerned denial of A.C.P. benefits allegedly granted to juniors.

The State did not appear at the hearing.

Whether the petitioner’s claim for grant of first A.C.P. benefits with effect from 1 January 2016 could be pursued as a service grievance under the Bihar Government Servant Grievance Redressal Rules, 2019?

Whether the writ petition should be disposed of by directing the petitioner to avail the statutory grievance-redressal mechanism rather than seeking immediate adjudication of the A.C.P. claim on merits?

The Court applied the Bihar Government Servant Grievance Redressal Rules, 2019.

Rule 2(c) defines “complaint” to include matters relating to service benefits, including promotion, A.C.P. and M.A.C.P., while excluding matters already pending before a court, disciplinary or departmental proceedings, transfers/postings/deputation, and matters under the Right to Information Act.

Rule 3 prescribes that serving or retired State Government employees may file complaints relating to service matters or retirement benefits through the online mechanism; ordinarily, only one subject may be raised in each complaint.

The governing principle applied was that an available statutory or administrative grievance-redressal mechanism should ordinarily be pursued for service-benefit disputes before the High Court grants substantive relief under writ jurisdiction.

The petitioner’s grievance concerned the alleged non-grant of first A.C.P. benefits, a subject expressly covered by Rule 2(c)(4) of the 2019 Rules.

Since the dispute related to a service benefit and was not shown to fall within any of the exclusions under Rule 2(c), the Court held that the petitioner had an available remedy under the prescribed grievance-redressal mechanism.

Rather than adjudicating whether the petitioner was substantively entitled to A.C.P. benefits from 1 January 2016, the Court directed him to file a complaint before the competent authority in accordance with Rule 3.

It directed the petitioner to file a complaint under the Bihar Government Servant Grievance Redressal Rules, 2019 within 30 days from the date of judgment.

The concerned authority was directed to decide the complaint strictly within the time prescribed under the Rules.

The writ petition was accordingly disposed of.