Advertisement
Advertisement

― Advertisement ―

HomeJitendra Kumar Sinha vs The State Of Bihar on 25 March, 2026

Jitendra Kumar Sinha vs The State Of Bihar on 25 March, 2026

ADVERTISEMENT

Patna High Court

Jitendra Kumar Sinha vs The State Of Bihar on 25 March, 2026

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                   Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16143 of 2022
     ======================================================
     Jitendra Kumar Sinha Son of Gopal Prasad R/o-Mohalla-Murarpur, P.O. and
     P.S.-Murarpur Katari, Kamasi, District-Sheikhpura, Bihar-811105.

                                                               ... ... Petitioner/s
                                       Versus
1.   The State of Bihar through Principal Secreary, Water Resources Department,
     Government of Bihar, Patna.
2.   The Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar,
     Patna.
3.   The Joint Secretary (Management), Water              Resources    Department,
     Government of Bihar, Patna.
4.   The Deputy Secretary (Management), Water Resources Department,
     Government of Bihar, Patna.
5.   The Deputy Secretary (personal Claim Determiantion Cell), Finance
     Department Government of Bihar, Patna.
6.   The Superintending Engineer, Irrigation Circle Nawada
7.   The Accountant General Bihar. Birchand Patel Path, Patna.

                                               ... ... Respondent/s
     ======================================================
     Appearance :
     For the Petitioner/s          :       Mr. Alok Ranjan, Advocate
     For the State                 :       Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh, Sr. Adv ( Ga 2)
     for the Accountant General    :       Dr. Anand Kumar
                                           Mr. Rajan Prakash, Adv (AC to GA-2)
     ======================================================
     CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RITESH KUMAR
     CAV JUDGMENT
     Date : 25-03-2026
                  Heard the parties.

                      2. The present writ petition has been filed for the

      following reliefs:-

                              "(i) For directing and commanding the
                              respondent authorities to grant six annual
                              pay increments, which has illegally been
                              with held on account of non-passing of
                              departmental examination, since 2012.
                              (ii). For directing and commanding the
 Patna High Court CWJC No.16143 of 2022 dt. 25-03-2026
                                           2/23




                                 respondent authorities for making payment
                                 of consequential benefits ( including retiral
                                 benefits)        after   granting   six   annual
                                 increments and also for payment of entire
                                 dues amount along with interest from the
                                 date it had became due, till actual date of
                                 payment.
                                 (iii). For awarding cost of litigation in favor
                                 of petitioner for unncessarily harassing him
                                 mentally as well as physically and for non
                                 grant of annual pay increments well within
                                 time and withholding the same on nonest
                                 grounds.
                                 (iv). And, for any other relief, which may
                                 deem fit and proper in the facts and
                                 circumstances of the case."
                         3. The brief facts giving rise to the present writ

         petition is that the petitioner was appointed as a Junior Engineer

         and subsequent thereto gave his joining in the month of

         February, 1979 on the post of Junior Engineer. Later on, he was

         promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer and subsequently

         superannuated after attaining the age of superannuation w.e.f.

         30.09.2017

from the office of the Irrigation Cirle Nawada,. It is

the case of the petitioner that there is a provision for grant of

SPONSORED

annual increment and for the same the employees needs to

appear and pass departmental examination and if an employee,
Patna High Court CWJC No.16143 of 2022 dt. 25-03-2026
3/23

who has appeared thrice in the departmental examination and

has attained the age of fifty years, the annual increment cannot

be stopped and the same will be granted to the employees and

has been clarified by various resolutions and circulars issued by

the authorities of the State Government from time to time

including letter No. 4674 dated 15.05.1992 and letter No. 4368

dated 28.08.2009. The same were later on further clarified vide

notification contained in Memo No. 3127 dated 03.06.2018

issued by the General Administration Department Government

of Bihar, Patna.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits

that in view of the provisions of the State Government, the

petitioner also participated in the Departmental examination,

thrice, held in different years, but he could not succeed.

Accordingly, as per the resolution of the State Government since

he had attained the age of fifty years, the petitioner filed

representation before the competent authority, with a request

that since he has attained the age of fifty years and pursuant to

departmental guidelines which provides that upon attaining the

age of fifty years, the employees will be exempted from passing

the departmental examination, he may be exempted from same.

The petitioner repeatedly approached the respondent authorities
Patna High Court CWJC No.16143 of 2022 dt. 25-03-2026
4/23

with a request to grant him exemption from passing the

departmental examination, in view of different circulars issued

by the State Government from time to time, but no heed was

paid to the request of the petitioner and the respondent

authorities did not grant annual increment to the petitioner since

2012 and after attaining the age of superannuation the petitioner

superannuated from his service in the year 2017. The petitioner

again filed a representation on 29.06.2018, before the Assistant

Engineer Irrigation Sub Division Giddheswar, Jamui, with a

request that since he has attained the age of fifty eight years and

participated in the departmental examination in January, 2010

and further in July, 2010 and in view of different circulars of the

General Administration Department, which provides for

exemption from appearing in the departmental examination, on

attaining the age of fifty years, the exemption be granted to him

but the same has till date not been granted and in the meantime,

the petitioner superannuated on 30.09.2017, therefore,

appropriate order be passed on his representation. The petitioner

having got no other alternative again filed a representation

before the Joint Secretary, Administration, Water Resource

Department, Patna on 03.06.2022 with a request to consider his

representation for being exempted from appearing in the
Patna High Court CWJC No.16143 of 2022 dt. 25-03-2026
5/23

departmental examination on attaining the age of fifty years in

view of letter No. 4674 dated 15.05.1992 and letter No. 4368

dated 28.08.2009 issued from the General Administration

Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. It was further

requested that since the same exemption has not been granted to

the petitioner his six increments have been withheld.

5. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the

respondents No. 1 to 4 wherein it has been stated that the

petitioner was promoted on the post of Assistant Engineer

( Bihar Engineering Service, Class II) in the year 2009 and

superannuated from the said post on 30.09.2017. The mode of

recruitment in Bihar Engineering Service class II has been

provided in appendix 1 of the Bihar PWD Court (Volume II).

Rule, 1 part I provides that the service shall be recruited (i) by

direct recruitment in accordance with the rules in part II or (ii)

by the promotion or transfer of Officers already in government

service, permanent or temporary in accordance with the rules in

part III.

6. The learned counsel for respondent-State further

submits that the petitioner entered Bihar Engineering Service

Class II in year 2009 when he was granted promotion to the

post of Assistant Engineer under said Rule 1 (ii). Part I of
Patna High Court CWJC No.16143 of 2022 dt. 25-03-2026
6/23

appendix IV of the Bihar PWD Code (Volume II) provides for

Rules dealing with departmental examination of Officers and

the sub-ordinates of the public works department (Roads &

building and Irrigation). As per Rule 3, an Officer who fails to

pass his departmental examination within the prescribed time

i.e. for languages within the period prescribed in Rule, 5 and for

law ( part A, B and C) within two years of joining his

appointment, will receive no further increment of pay until the

examination is passed. The said rule further provides that as per

part II of Appendix IV dealing with the professional

examination of Assistant Engineers. As per the Rule 1 all

Assistant Engineers of the PWD ( Building and Road), Public

Health Engineering Department, Irrigation and Electricity

Department, must pass the professional examination prescribed

in the Public Works Department Code, Paragraph No. 55 within

three years of joining their appointment in the State.

7. The learned counsel for the State further submits

that as per Rule 7, in the event of an Officer failing to pass the

examination within the period specified in Rule 1, his

increments will be withheld and arrears of increments so

withheld will not be granted to him on his passing the

examination, except in special cases where his failure to pass
Patna High Court CWJC No.16143 of 2022 dt. 25-03-2026
7/23

has been due to circumstances beyond his control.

8. The learned counsel for the State further submits

that from the provisions contained therein it will transpire that

an Assistant Engineer is required to pass departmental

examination within a period of two years and professional

examination within a period of three years of his appointment/

promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer, otherwise he/ she

will not be entitled to get increment of pay after the said period.

In case of the petitioner, he was promoted to the post of

Assistant Engineer in the year 2009 but he neither passed the

departmental examination nor the professional examination,

within the aforementioned prescribed period, rather before lapse

of the said period he submitted an application in the years 2010

itself for exempting him from departmental examination as well

as professional examination in the light of the government

circular issued by the personal and Administrative Department,

Bihar, Patna and as such his application was premature,

therefore, the same was not considered. However, no increment

of the petitioner was withheld during the prescribed period of

three years i.e. till 2012.

9. The learned counsel for the respondent-State

further submits that clause 3 of Government circular dated
Patna High Court CWJC No.16143 of 2022 dt. 25-03-2026
8/23

15.05.1992 provides that exemption from passing departmental

examination will be given to only those government servants,

who attempted the examination continuously but failed or could

not appear in the examination due to officials reasons or

departmental examination was not conducted during the last five

years, before attaining the age of fifty years. The petitioner

appeared in the departmental examination held in the year 2010,

twice and in the professional examination held in the year 2012

once. Therefore, it is clear that the petitioner did not make any

attempt, to clear the departmental examination and professional

examination, continuously, before attaining the age of fifty

years.

10. The learned counsel for the respondent State

further submits that clause 5 of the Government circular dated

15.05.1992 is clear that right to exemption from passing

departmental examination will be discretionary and not

mandatory. After his superannuation in September, 2017 the

petitioner again submitted an application on 29.06.2018 with a

request to exempt him from passing the departmental

examination, but since the order of exemption was to be

effective from the date of application, in view of the provisions

contained in Rule 3 of the Bihar Government Servants
Patna High Court CWJC No.16143 of 2022 dt. 25-03-2026
9/23

exemption from passing the departmental examination Rule,

2018, as notified by the General Administration Department,

Government of Bihar, Patna vide notification No. 3127 dated

06.03.2018, there was no justification of passing such an order

after superannuation of the petitioner, therefore, the application

of the petitioner and some other such retired Assistant Engineers

were rejected by the competent authority and the said order was

communicated vide Memo No. 170 dated 31.01.2020.

11. The learned counsel for the State lastly

submitted that from the aforesaid facts it is clear that the

petitioner neither passed the departmental and professional

examination nor he was exempted from passing the said

examination during his service period, as such the petitioner has

not been granted the increment and is not entitled to get the

increment of pay after lapse of the prescribed period of three

years for passing the said examination, as provided in the Bihar

P.W.D. Code (Volume. II).

12. The learned counsel for the petitioner refers to

and relies on a judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this court

dated 22.09.2023 passed in CWJC No. 19193/2015 Ranjana

Devi Vs. State of Bihar and Others wherein in paragraph No. 2,

it has been held as follows:-

Patna High Court CWJC No.16143 of 2022 dt. 25-03-2026
10/23

“2. At the outset, the learned counsel for
the petitioner has referred to the judgment
rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the
case of Amresh Kr. Singh and others vs. The
State of Bihar and others
, reported in 2023
(2) PLJR (SC) 423 to submit that the
Hon’ble Apex Court has held that fulfilment
of education qualifications prescribed
under the recruitment rules for the purposes
of promotion are not necessary for non-

functional in-situ promotion, hence for
purposes of granting benefits of
A.C.P./M.A.C.P., passing of any exam is not
necessary. This aspect of the matter has
also been considered by a learned Division
Bench of this Court in the case of The State
of Bihar and others vs. Sri Ram Subhag
Singh
, reported in 2022(2) PLJR 773,
wherein the learned Division Bench of this
Court has held that non-passing of
departmental exam shall not be an
impediments for grant of benefits of
A.C.P./M.A.C.P.”

13. The learned counsel petitioner further relies on

a judgment dated 13.04.2021 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench

of this Court in CWJC No. 4443 of 2021 Choudhary Bimal

Kumar Roy Vs. State of Bihar and Ors wherein in paragraph

Nos. 03 and 04, it has been held as follows:-

Patna High Court CWJC No.16143 of 2022 dt. 25-03-2026
11/23

“3. The for the learned counsel appearing

respondent-State has submitted that the issue

in question is no longer res integra,

inasmuch as the same has already been

adjudged by the learned Division Bench of

this Court in a judgment rendered in the case

of State of Bihar & Ors. vs. Smt. Jivachi

Devi, reported in 2020(2) BLJ 471,

paragraphs no. 5 to 9 whereof are

reproduced hereinbelow:-

“5. On the other hand, learned counsel

appearing for the respondent submits that

the issue involved in the appeal is no more

res integra as the same has already been

decided by the Division Benches of this

Court in the following decisions-

(i). Bishwanath Prasad v. The State of

Bi-har, reported in (2011) 2 PLJR 136

(ii). Avinash Chandra Singh v. The

State of Bihar, reported in (2012) 1
Patna High Court CWJC No.16143 of 2022 dt. 25-03-2026
12/23

PLJR 663.

(iii). Uday Shankar Prasad v. The

State of Bihar, reported in (2017) 3

PLJR 824.

(iv). Judgment dated 19.3.2018,

passed in LPA No. 599/2015

(Ramadhar Thakur v. The State of

Bihar)

6. Having heard learned counsel for

the parties and on-going through the

records, it appears that the facts are

not in dispute between the parties. The

only issue involved in the appeal is as

to whether passing of departmental

accounts exami-nation would be

necessary for grant of benefits of

Assured Career Progression, provided

under the Bihar State Employees

Conditions of Service (Assured Career

Progression Scheme) Rules, 2003 read

with Clause (J) of Sub-rule (3) of Rule
Patna High Court CWJC No.16143 of 2022 dt. 25-03-2026
13/23

157 of the Bihar Boards Miscellaneous

Rules, 1958. I am in agreement with

the submissions advanced by learned

counsel appearing on behalf of the

respondent that the issue, in hand, is

no more res integra as the same has

already been decided by different

Division Benches of this Court in a

catena of similar cases, mentioned

herein below-

(i) State of Bihar v. Anjani Kumar, re-

ported in (2013) 2 PLJR 643

(ii). Uday Shankar Prasad v. The State

of Bihar, reported in (2017) 3 PLJR

824 and

(ii). Ramadhar Thakur v. State of Bi-

har, reported in LPA No. 599 of 2015.

7. Recently, a Division Bench of this

Court in case of Ramadhar Thakur

(supra), after extensive analysis and

dis-cussion of the provision of rule

157(3)(J) of the Bihar Boards
Patna High Court CWJC No.16143 of 2022 dt. 25-03-2026
14/23

Miscellaneous Rules 1958 and Rule 4

(clause 5) of the Bihar State

Employees Service Condition (As-

sured Career Progression Scheme)

Rules, 2003, conclusively held after

referring to various judgments, viz.,

Mithilesh Kumar Sinha v. The State of

Bihar [(2006) 1 PLJR 282] Syed

Mozammil Ashraf v. The State of Bihar

[(2007) 1 PLJR 438]: Shashi Shekhar

Ambasta v. The State of Bihar [(2011)

3 PLJR 474]; Maheshwar Prasad

Singh v. The State of Bihar [(2000) 4

PLJR 262]; Rameshwar Roy v The

State of Bihar [(2017) 2 PLJR 127].

Daya Shankar Singh v. The State of

Bihar [(2010) 3 PLJR 220] and Md.

Shamsuddin v. The State of Bihar

[1983 PLJR 347] that Rule 157(3) (J)

of the Bihar Boards Miscellaneous

Rules 1958 makes the passing of the

departmental accounts examination a
Patna High Court CWJC No.16143 of 2022 dt. 25-03-2026
15/23

condition precedent for promotion to

the selection grade, but not for general

promotion and for not passing such

exam, the benefits of the A.C.P Rules,

2003, also cannot be withheld, unless

there is a departmental rule for pro-

motion. In other words, the Bench held

that passing of departmental accounts

examination is not a condition

precedent for grant of ACP Rules nor

does Rule 157(3)(J) of the Bihar

Boards Miscellaneous Rules, 1958

conceive of such a re-quirement. The

same issue is also been involved in the

case of Masomat Indu Devi v. State of

Bihar, reported in (2019) 2 PLJR 241

in which the learned Single Judge of

this Court has reiterated the same view

and held that passing of ac-counts

examination or departmental

examination, as the case may be,

under the Bihar Boards Miscellaneous
Patna High Court CWJC No.16143 of 2022 dt. 25-03-2026
16/23

Rules, 1958 would be necessary for

crossing efficiency bar, confirmation

and for promotion to selection grade,

but not general promotion. I also find

that the provisions of the Bihar Water

Resources Department Field Steno

Typist’s Cadre (Recruitment and

Service Condition) Rules, 2014 does

not apply in the respondent’s case as

respondent’s husband superannuated

from service in the year 2011. I do not

find any reason to differ with the

decision passed by co-ordinate

benches of this Court.

8. In the facts and circumstances of the

case and taking into account the law

laid down by the successive Division

Benches of this Court as discussed

above, I am of the considered view that

the appellants are not justified in

refusing benefits of the financial

progression to the husband of the
Patna High Court CWJC No.16143 of 2022 dt. 25-03-2026
17/23

respondent on the ground that he did

not pass the account or departmental

examination. In view of the law

pronounced by the courts in the

similar cases as dis-cussed above, I do

not find any infirmity in the judgment

of the writ court, as such, the instant

appeal, being devoid of merit, is

accordingly dismissed.

9. Consequently, appellants are

directed to consider the case of the

respondent’s husband for grant of ACP

within eight weeks from the date of

receipt/produc-tion of a copy of this

order.”

4. Having regard to the judgment rendered

by the learned Division Bench of this Court

in the case of Smt. Jivachi Devi (supra), this

Court finds that the case of the petitioner is

required to be considered for the purposes
Patna High Court CWJC No.16143 of 2022 dt. 25-03-2026
18/23

of grant of benefits of A.C.P./M.A.C.P., de

hors the fact that he has not passed the

departmental examination.

Accordingly, the Collector,

Samastipur is directed to consider the case

of the petitioner for grant of the benefits of

A.C.P./M.A.C.P. in light of the judgment

rendered by the learned Division Bench of

this Court in the case of Smt. Jivachi Devi

(supra) and pass appropriate orders within

a period of six weeks of receipt/ production

of a copy of this order.”

14. The learned counsel for the petitioner while

placing reliance on the judgments passed in the case of Ranjana

Devi (supra) and Choudhary Bimal Kumar Roy (supra)

submits, that passing the departmental examination is not

necessary for grant of increment and as such the petitioner is

entitled to be granted the said exemption and on the basis of the

exemption, he is entitled for being given annual increments.

15. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties

and after going through the materials available on record, it

appears that the petitioner appeared in the departmental
Patna High Court CWJC No.16143 of 2022 dt. 25-03-2026
19/23

examination on different occasions, for three times, but not in

continuation, rather he appeared in the examination held in

different years. Further the petitioner after appearing in the

examination only once, filed the application for exemption from

passing departmental examination in 2010 itself, in view of the

circular of the State Government issued from time to time,

including Letter No. 4674 dated 15.05.1992 and Letter No. 4368

dated 28.08.2009. It appears from circular of the State

Government dated 15.05.1992, that the exemption is not to be

granted as a matter of right, rather the same is discretionary,

meaning thereby that if a candidate who appears in departmental

examination continuously and fails to qualify in the

examination, then in that case he may file the application before

the competent authority for granting exemption from passing the

departmental examination, in view of the circular of the State

Government dated 15.05.1992. There is no concept of deemed

exemption. The petitioner was required to pass the departmental

examination within a period of 2 years from the date of his

promotion and the professional examination within a period of

three years of his promotion i.e. from the year 2009.

16. Further the reliance placed by the learned

counsel for the petitioner on the different pronouncement of Co-
Patna High Court CWJC No.16143 of 2022 dt. 25-03-2026
20/23

ordinate Benches of this Court relates to passing departmental

examination for grant of benefits of A.C.P./M.A.C.P. and the

said orders/judgments have been affirmed till the Hon’ble

Supreme Court of India in the case of Amersh Kumar Sinha

(supra). In the present case, the petitioner is an Assistant

Engineer and he has filed the present writ petition for grant of

annual increment which has been withheld on account of non-

passing of the departmental examination, in view of the circular

of the State Government dated 15.05.1992 and 28.08.2009. The

said circular of the State Government dated 15.05.1992 was

considered by a Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A.

No. 1828 of 2012 (the State of Bihar & Ors. Vs. Anjani

Kumar) wherein the Hon’ble Division Bench, although was

considering the matter relating to grant of A.C.P., after

considering different pronouncement of this Hon’ble Court, in

paragraph nos. 05 to 08 has held as follows and based on the

said consideration proceeded to allow the appeal filed by the

State.

“5. It is not in dispute that the promotion in
question is governed by the Bihar Board’s
Miscellaneous Rules, 1958. Rule 157 of the
said Rules provides for passing of the
Departmental Accounts Examination, a
condition precedent for further promotion.
Patna High Court CWJC No.16143 of 2022 dt. 25-03-2026
21/23

The writ petitioner had not passed the
Departmental Accounts Examination. He
was, therefore, not eligible for promotion.
Consequently he was not entitled to the
financial progression under Assured Career
Progression.

6. Four years after retirement from service in
2008, the writ petitioner approached this
Court to claim exemption from passing the
Departmental Accounts Examination and
consequential promotion relying on the
Government Circular dated 15th May, 1992.
The writ petitioner claims that the writ
petitioner had passed in two of the three
papers, he was, therefore, entitled to
exemption as envisaged by the aforesaid
Circular dated 15th May, 1992. The learned
single Judge, having observed that the
exemption was not a matter of right, has
issued direction as if the writ petitioner has
been granted exemption. We may note here
that at no point of time the petitioner had
been granted exemption as recorded by the
learned single Judge; nor is there a concept
of deemed exemption referred to by the
learned single Judge. Besides, the most
disturbing factor is that the aforesaid Rules
of 1958 do not provide for exemption from
passing the Departmental Accounts
Examination. In absence of any provision for
Patna High Court CWJC No.16143 of 2022 dt. 25-03-2026
22/23

exemption, no Government servant could
have been exempted from passing the said
examination; nor would a Government
servant be entitled to promotion on attaining
the age of 50 years without passing the
Departmental Accounts Examination. The
Circular dated 15th May, 1992 offends the
very basic principle that the statutory rules
cannot be improved or modified or altered
by an executive order, the statutory rules
shall prevail. The Circular dated 15th May,
1992, being contrary to the statutory rules,
cannot be enforced. The claim for exemption
based on the said Circular dated 15th May,
1992 cannot be countenanced.

7. A Full Bench of this Court has, as early as
in 2000, in the matter of Maheshwar Prasad
Singh v. The State of Bihar, Ors.
[2000 (4)
PLJR 262], enunciated the said principle to
hold that the Government cannot amend,
modify or supersede the statutory rules by
administrative instructions.
The judgment in
the matter of Dinesh Narayan Mishra
(supra) is per incuriam the above-referred
judgment in the matter of Maheshwar
Prasad Singh.

8. This matter has been considered by us in
the matter of The State of Bihar & Ors. vs.
Kusheswar Nath Pandey
, [2013 (1) PLJR
939].
In our opinion, the impugned order
Patna High Court CWJC No.16143 of 2022 dt. 25-03-2026
23/23

made by the learned single Judge is contrary
to the judgments in the matter of
Maheshwar Prasad Singh (supra) and
Kusheswar Nath Pandey (supra).”

17. Accordingly, from the consideration made

above, this Court finds that the petitioner did not appear in the

departmental examination continuously as provided in clause 3

of the circular dated 15.05.1992 and filed his application for

exemption from passing departmental examination on

27.07.2010 itself, i.e. prior to him appearing in the examination

continuously, as per the circular dated 15.05.1992.

18. Accordingly, I find no merit in the present writ

petition and the same is dismissed.

19. Pending applications, if any, shall also stands

disposed of.

(Ritesh Kumar, J)

krishnakant/-

AFR/NAFR                NAFR
CAV DATE                03.02.2026
Uploading Date          25.03.2026
Transmission Date       NA
 



Source link