01Facts
The petitioner sought a direction granting him second ACP benefits with effect from 1 November 2009, together with consequential arrears, revised pay and pensionary benefits, additional pay for work on a higher post, and interest
p. 2He relied on the Full Bench decision in Kamla Nand Thakur v. State of Bihar & Ors., reported at 2025 (2) PLJR 623, concerning the inapplicability of the departmental accounts examination requirement to ACP benefits.
pp. 3–4The State objected that the petitioner’s service-related grievance fell within the Bihar Government Servant Grievance Redressal Rules, 2019.
p. 402Issues
i.1. Whether the petitioner’s claim for ACP and related service or retirement benefits could be raised under the Bihar Government Servant Grievance Redressal Rules, 2019
pp. 4–5ii.2. Whether the High Court should determine the petitioner’s entitlement to the claimed benefits in the writ petition, or instead permit him to pursue the prescribed grievance procedure
pp. 5–603Law Applied
Rule 2(c) of the Bihar Government Servant Grievance Redressal Rules, 2019 defines a complaint to include service and service-benefit matters, including promotion, ACP/MACP, salary, and retirement benefits; it excludes matters already under consideration by a court.
pp. 4–5Rule 3 provides that serving or retired State Government employees may lodge service-related complaints online, with a separate application required for each subject.
p. 5The petitioner relied on the Full Bench ruling in Kamla Nand Thakur, which held, among other things, that the departmental accounts examination requirement under Rule 157(3)(J) of the Bihar Board’s Miscellaneous Rules, 1958 does not apply to the grant of ACP benefits under the ACP Rules, 2003.
pp. 3–4The Court did not determine the merits or application of that precedent to the petitioner’s claim.
pp. 3–404Reasoning
The Court considered the nature of the relief sought and the State’s objection, then found that the 2019 Rules covered the petitioner’s grievances concerning ACP and other service and retirement benefits.
pp. 4–5Rather than decide whether the petitioner was substantively entitled to the claimed benefits or whether Kamla Nand Thakur governed his case, the Court directed him to raise all his points through the prescribed complaint process.
pp. 5–6It left determination of the complaint to the competent authority under the Rules.
pp. 5–605Holding
The Court disposed of the writ petition without deciding the petitioner’s substantive entitlement to ACP or other benefits.
p. 6It granted him liberty to file a complaint under the Bihar Government Servant Grievance Redressal Rules, 2019 within 30 days, raising all his grounds, and directed the concerned authority to pass orders within the time prescribed by those Rules.
p. 6Original Court PDF
Suresh Nandan SahayvsThe State of Bihar
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
