HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 63 of 2022 Court No. - 1 HON'BLE RAJAN ROY, J. HON'BLE ZAFEER AHMAD, J. 1. Heard Sri Girish Chandra Verma, learned Senior counsel assisted by Sri Vinay Kumar Verma learned counsel for the appellant and learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. As the judgment impugned was passed on 24.12.2021 during the Covid pandemic, therefore, the appeal in view of the order passed by the Supreme Court in Suo Moto Writ Petition (C) No.3 of 2020 is treated as within limitation as prescribed for filing the appeal. 3. We now proceed to hear the appeal on merits. 4. Learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petion only on the ground, for grant of third financial upgradation under the Assured Career Progression scheme, satisfactorily completion of 26 years of service is required and the claim of the appellant-petitioner has been rejected by the opposite party no. 2 on the ground of his conviction in a criminal case which has not been stayed, however, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant had completed 26 years of service on 31.10.2005 whereas his conviction in the criminal case, which is already subjudice in appeal before the High Court, is dated 5.3.2008 i.e. subsequent to the satisfaction of the aforesaid condition but this aspect has been lost sight of by the learned Single Judge. 5. We have perused the order dated 16.8.2018 which was impugned before the writ court. The only reason for denying the third financial upgradation under the Assured Career Progression Scheme is the appellant's conviction in criminal case, without even mentioning the Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Anil Kumar Srivastava, Girish Chandra Verma, Neetesh Kumar, Vinay Kumar Verma Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Ram Lotan Shukla .....Appellant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Medical Education) And Others .....Respondent(s) details thereof. 6. The facts as placed before us by Sri Verma, learned Senior counsel assisted by Sri Vinay Kumar Verma have not been taken note of. The judgment of conviction is on record, which corroborates the statement of Sri Verma as regards completion of 26 years of service on 31.10.2005. The appointment letter is dated 4.10.1979. 7. In any case these aspects should have been taken into consideration while considering the claim of the appellant and a decision should have been taken as to what would be the impact of subsequent conviction on the claim as raised herein. 8. We accordingly set aside the judgement/order dated 24.12.2021 passed by the writ court as well as the order dated 16.8.2018 passed by the opposite party no. 2. 9. Consequently, we direct the Director, Ayurvedic Services, U.P. Lucknow to take a fresh decision in the matter after getting the said facts verified as to on what date the appellant had completed requisite satisfactory service which as per the government order and rules would entitle him to the third financial upgradation under the Assured Career Progression scheme. Secondly, the date of his conviction whether it is prior to the date of such entitlement or subsequent thereto and if it is subsequent thereto, what would be impact of the conviction on such claim as raised by the appellant for grant of third financial upgradation under the Assured Career Progression scheme keeping in view the law and having regard to the relevant government orders/Rules etc. as may be applicable. 10. Let this exercise be completed within three months. 11. Needless to say that if the claim is found to be tenable and the appellant is found entitled for grant of the said benefit, it shall be extended to him without any further delay i.e. within one month of such decision. 12. The appeal is allowed in part. November 20, 2025 kanhaiya SPLA No. 63 of 2022 2 (Zafeer Ahmad,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.) Digitally signed by :- KANHAIYA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench