Patna High Court
Administrative and Public LawEmployment and Labour Law

ACP/MACP service-benefit disputes fall within Bihar’s 2019 Government Servant Grievance Redressal Rules.

Yashabarit Kumar Singh Deo vs The State of Bihar

Patna High CourtJUDGMENT: October 01, 20261 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
ACP/MACP service-benefit disputes fall within Bihar’s 2019 Government Servant Grievance Redressal Rules.. Yashabarit Kumar Singh Deo vs The State of Bihar. Patna High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The petitioner sought grant of benefits under the Assured Career Progression (ACP) and Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) schemes, consequential revision of pay and pension, and payment of arrears and other benefits.

Source reference: p.2

The State objected that the grievance fell within the Bihar Government Servant Grievance Redressal Rules, 2019.

Source reference: p.2

The Court considered the Rules’ definition of a service-benefit complaint and the procedure for filing one.

Source reference: pp.2–3
02

Issues

Whether the petitioner’s claim for ACP/MACP benefits and consequential service and retirement benefits was covered by the Bihar Government Servant Grievance Redressal Rules, 2019.

Source reference: pp.2–3

Whether the petitioner should first be permitted to pursue the complaint procedure under those Rules.

Source reference: p.3
03

Law Applied

Rule 2(c) of the Bihar Government Servant Grievance Redressal Rules, 2019 defines “complaint” to include service-benefit matters concerning promotion, ACP and MACP, salary, and retirement benefits, including pension.

Source reference: pp.2–3

It excludes matters already under consideration before a court.

Source reference: pp.2–3

Rule 3 provides that serving or retired Bihar Government employees may file complaints online, generally addressing only one subject in each application.

Source reference: p.3
04

Reasoning

The Court noted that the petitioner’s claims concerned ACP/MACP, pay and pension—matters expressly included within “complaint” under Rule 2(c).

Source reference: pp.2–3

In view of the State’s objection and the complaint procedure prescribed by Rule 3, the Court granted the petitioner liberty to pursue that procedure.

Source reference: p.3

It did not adjudicate the petitioner’s substantive entitlement to the benefits claimed.

Source reference: p.3
05

Holding

The Court disposed of the writ petition, granting the petitioner liberty to file a complaint under the 2019 Rules within 30 days.

The concerned authority was directed to pass orders within the time specified in those Rules.

Source reference: p.3
Patna High Court

Original Court PDF

Yashabarit Kumar Singh DeovsThe State of Bihar

Patna High Court · October 01, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment