2026:JHHC:15321 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 363 of 2021 ….….. 1. Makar Choudhary, Aged about- 57 Years, Son of Late Sabha Kant Choudhary, Resident of Sri Ganesh Apartment Ashok Vihar, P.O. Ashok Nagar, P.S. Argora, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand. 2. Priya Ranjan Sinha, Aged about 59 years, Son of Sri Shankar Prasad Sinha, Resident of Som Vihar, behind Doctor Colony, Bariatu, P.O. & P.S. Bariatu, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand. 3. Abhay Kumar Gupta, Aged about- 59 years, Son of Late Kali Charan Prasad, Resident of Shakti Apartment, Mango Chowk, East Singhbhum, P.O. & P.S. Mango, District- Jamshedpur, Jharkhand. 4. Manoj Kumar, Aged about- 57 years, Son of Late Akhileshwar Prasad, Resident of Dinkar Nagar Hatia Station Road, P.O. & P.S. Hatia, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand. 5. Bhim Singh, Aged about 57 years, Son of Ram Chandra Singh, Resident of D-104, Gokul Dham Apartment, Morabadi. P.S. Bariatu, P.O. Morabadi, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand. 6. Raghbendra Chaudhary, Aged about 57 years, Son of Late Anand Kumar Chaudhary, Resident of Aishwarya Residency B19, Road No.2, P.O. Pundag, P.S. Jagannathpur, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand. …. Petitioners VERSUS 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Secretary, Water Resources Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Nepal House, P.O. Doranda, P.S. Doranda, District-Ranchi. 3. The Special Secretary, Water Resources Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Nepal House, P.O. Doranda, P.S. Doranda, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand. 4. The Principal Secretary, Planning-Cum-Finance, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagannathpur, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand. 5. The Under Secretary, Water Resources Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagannathpur, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand. ..... Respondent(s) with ….….. W.P.(S) No. 4337 of 2020 2026:JHHC:15321 2 ….….. Kumar Arvind, aged about 54 years, son of Sri Saryu Prasad Singh, resident of Sector-8, Road No. 7, C.H. Area, Jamshedpur, P.O. & P.S. Bistupur, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. …. Petitioners VERSUS 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Special Secretary to the Govt., Water Resources Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Nepal House, P.O. Doranda, P.S. Doranda, District - Ranchi. 3. Secretary to the Govt., Water Resources Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Nepal House, P.O. Doranda, P.S. Doranda, District - Ranchi. 4. The Principal Secretary, Planning-cum-Finance, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagannathpur, District Ranchi. 5. The Joint Secretary, Water Resources Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagannathpur, District Ranchi. ..... Respondent(s) with ….….. W.P.(S) No. 544 of 2021 ….….. 1. Anil Kumar Sharma, aged about 60 years, son of Late Sukdeo Prasad Sharma, resident of Flat No. 323- E, Aditya Syndicate, Adityapur-2, P.O. & P.S. RIT, District Seraikella-Kharsawan, Jharkhand. 2. Shrawan Kumar, aged about 59 years, son of Late Chandra Shekhar Singh, resident of Chandra Sharda Sadan, Parmeshwar Dayal Road, P.O. and P.S. Deoghar, District Deoghar, Jharkhand. 3. Ramji Prasad, aged about 59 years, son of Late Karu Sah, resident of 502/D, Bansal Plaza Apartment, Station Road, Ranchi, P.O. and P.S. Chutia, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. 4. Yogendra Kumar Mall, aged about 60 years, son of Late Devi Prasad Mall, resident of K-205, Kedar Dham, Gharounda Enclave, Sanjay Path, Dimna Road, Mango, P.O. Mango, P.S. Olidih, Town Jamshedpur, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 5. Subhash Chandra Chaurasia, aged about 65 years, son of Late Ram Lakhan Chaurasia, resident of New Subhash Colony, Road No.-1, Dimna Road, Mango, 2026:JHHC:15321 3 P.O. and P.S. Mango, Town Jamshedpur, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 6. Ajoy Kumar Singh, aged about 58 years, son of Late Sukhdeo Singh, resident of Q. No. 23, Kusumpuram Colony, Bailey Road, Naharpur, near Pipe Factory, P.O. & P.S. Danapur Cantt., District Patna, Bihar. 7. Girindra Mohan Prasad, aged about 60 years, son of Late Ganga Prasad, resident of Sunita Sadan, Sri Kant Road, Belabagan, P.O. and P.S. Deoghar, District Deoghar, Jharkhand. 8. Krishna Kumar Choudhary, aged about 56 years, son of Late Ram Sundar Choudhary, resident of C/o Renu Kumari, New Professor Colony, Dinkar Nagar, Begursarai, P.O. and P.S. Begursarai, District Begusarai, Bihar. 9. Surendra Prasad, aged about 59 years, son of Late Ganesh Prasad, resident of Swarnrekha Nagar, Road No.-1, Ketari Bagan, Lower Chutia, P.O. and P.S. Chutia, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. 10. Shankar Prasad, aged about 57 years, son of Late Ram Chandra Ram, resident of Lajpat Nagar, Road No.1, Pundag, P.O. and P.S. Pundag, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. 11. Bidya Bhushan Choudhary, aged about 60 years, son of Late Fauzadar Choudhary, resident of Village Malpura, P.O. Sakla Bazar, P.S. Rohtas, District Rohtas, Bihar. 12. Manoj Kumar Vidyarthi, aged about 56 years, son of Late Dhaneshwar Prasad Singh, resident of Ram Krishna Nagar, West of L.P. Shahi College, P.O. and P.S. New Jaganpura, District Patna, Bihar. 13. Jyoti Shankar Prasad, aged about 58 years, son of Late Hari Shankar Prasad, resident of Village Bhaiyadih, Gidhanda, P.O. and P.S. Sarwan, District Deoghar, Jharkhand. 14. Sunil Kumar Sinha, aged about 56 years, son of Sri Inder Chand Prasad, resident of E-504, Madhushudan Complex, Dimna Chowk, Mango, P.O. & P.S. Mango, Town Jamshedpur, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 15. Madan Mohan Singh, aged about 58 years, son of Late Ram Swarup Singh, resident of Flat No. 304, Indra Darwar Apartment, Saket Vihar, Harmu, P.O. and P.S. Argora, District Ranchi, Jharkhand, 16. Jay Prakash Singh, aged about 59 years, son of Late Ram Uchit Singh, resident of Sundar Vihar, Tiril, 2026:JHHC:15321 4 Kokar, P.O. R.M.C.H. Bariatu, P.S. Bariatu, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. 17. Mohan Chandra Gupta, aged about 56 years, son of Late Basudeo Gupta, resident of Near Poddar Bhawan, Krishnapuri, Road No.-3, Hazaribag, P.O. and P.S. Hazaribag, District Hazaribag, Jharkhand. 18. Ajay Kumar, aged about 56 years, son of Late Ram Nagina Singh, resident of Saket Vihar, Harmu Colony, P.O. Doranda, P.S. Argora, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. …. Petitioners VERSUS 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Special Secretary to the Govt., Water Resources Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagannathpur, District Ranchi. 3. The Principal Secretary, Planning-cum-Finance, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagannathpur, District Ranchi. 4. The Joint Secretary, Water Resources Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagannathpur, District Ranchi. 5. The Principal Accountant General, Jharkhand, Ranchi, P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi. ..... Respondent(s) with ….….. W.P.(S) No. 604 of 2021 ….….. 1. Om Prakash Anand, aged about 55 years, son of Sri Ashok Kumar Srivastava, resident of House No. D-93, Harmu Housing Colony, P.Ο.-Harmu, P.S.- Argora, Town and District- Ranchi. 2. Arun Kumar, aged about 59 years, son of Radhe Mohan Prasad, residing at Veer Kunwar Singh Colony, Hinoo, P.O.- Hinoo, P.S.- Doranda, Town and District- Ranchi. …. Petitioners VERSUS 1. The State of Jharkhand, through the Secretary/ Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, having office at Nepal House, Doranda, P.O. & P.S.- Doranda, Town and District- Ranchi. 2. Special Secretary to Government, Water Resources Department, Government of Jharkhand, having office at Nepal House, Doranda, P.O. & P.S.- Doranda, Town and District- Ranchi. 2026:JHHC:15321 5 3. Under Secretary to Government, Water Resources Department, Government of Jharkhand, having office at Nepal House, Doranda, P.O. & P.S.- Doranda, Town and District- Ranchi. 4. The Secretary / Principal Secretary, Planning-cum- Finance Department, Government of Jharkhand, having office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S.- Dhurwa, Town and District- Ranchi. ..... Respondent(s) with ….….. W.P.(S) No. 731 of 2021 ….….. 1. Ram Ballabh Mishra, aged about 56 years, S/o Late Onkar Nath Mishra, Resident of Flat No. 3/2, Galaxy Astha Space town, Dimna Road, P.O. & P.S.- Mango, District- Jamshedpur (East Singhbhum). 2. Shambhu Narayan Chaudhary, aged about 59 years, S/o late Ram Parikshan Chaudhary, Resident of Flat No. 2B, Vedika Apartment, Ashok Puram, P.O.- Doranda, P.S.- Argora, District- Ranchi. 3. Ram Narayan Mehta, aged about 60 years, S/o Late Ramawatar Mahto, Resident of Flat No.-329, Mehta's Ice, Bari Co-operative Colony, Bokaro Steel City, P.O. Sector-12, P.S.- Marafari, District-Bokaro. 4. Rajiv Ranjan, aged about 57 years, S/o Late Sanjeev Ranjan, Resident of Palkot Road, Gumla, P.O. & P.S.- Gumla, District- Gumla. …. Petitioners VERSUS 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. Secretary, Water Resources Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Nepal House, P.O. Doranda, P.S. Doranda, District - Ranchi. 3. The Principal Secretary, Planning-cum-Finance, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagannathpur, District -Ranchi. 4. The Special Secretary, Water Resources Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Nepal House, P.O. Doranda, P.S. Doranda, District - Ranchi. 5. The Joint Secretary, Water Resources Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Nepal House, P.O. Doranda, P.S. Doranda, District - Ranchi. 6. The Under Secretary, Water Resources Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Nepal House, P.O. Doranda, P.S. Doranda, District - Ranchi. ..... Respondent(s) with ….….. 2026:JHHC:15321 6 W.P.(S) No. 990 of 2021 ….….. Suresh Singh, aged about 59 years, son of Late Ram Charan Singh, resident of Bihatt (Maslanpur), Begusarai, P.O. Bihatt, P.S. Bahattni, District Begusarai. …. Petitioner VERSUS 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Special Secretary to the Govt., Water Resources Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagannathpur, District Ranchi. 3. The Principal Secretary, Planning-cum-Finance, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagannathpur, District Ranchi. 4. The Joint Secretary, Water Resources Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagannathpur, District Ranchi. ..... Respondent(s) with ….….. W.P.(S) No. 2095 of 2021 ….….. 1. Dhanushadhari Rai, aged about 58 years, son of Sri Mauje Rai, resident of Flat No.-303, Guru Kripa Mansion, Anpurna Chowk, Nagratoli, P.O. and P.S. Lalpur, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. 2. Anil Kumar Singh, aged about 60 years, son of Late Prasidh Narayan Singh, resident of Flat No. 2-C, Ramjanki Enclave, Oberia Road, Hatia, P.O. and P.S. Hatia, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. 3. Rajkumar Sah, aged about 58 years, son of Late Bhagwat Sah, resident of Madhu Villa, Laxmi Nagar, Tej Pratap Nagar, Anisabad, P.O. and P.S. Anisabad, District Patna, Bihar. 4. Lalan Prasad Singh, aged about 59 years, son of Sri Yamuna Prasad Singh, resident of Sundar Vihar, Tiril, Kokar, P.O. Bariyatu, P.S. Sadar, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. …. Petitioners VERSUS 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Special Secretary to the Govt., Water Resources Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagannathpur, District Ranchi. 3. The Principal Secretary, Planning-cum-Finance, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Project 2026:JHHC:15321 7 Building, Dhurwa, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagannathpur, District Ranchi. 4. The Joint Secretary, Water Resources Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagannathpur, District Ranchi. 5. The Principal Accountant General, Jharkhand, Ranchi, P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi. ..... Respondent(s) with ….….. W.P.(S) No. 2129 of 2021 ….….. 1. Amrendra Kumar Singh, aged about 65 years, Son of Mahendra Prasad Singh, resident of Vikash Enclave D Block Flat No. Dumerdaga, Buti More, P.O. and P.S. 221, Buti, District Ranchi; 2. Laxmi Narayan Lal, aged about 64 years, son of Late Baidynath Prasad Lal, resident of Shardha, Flat No. 1D, Block-A, Kunj Vihar, Argora, P.O. and P.S. Argora, District Ranchi. …. Petitioners VERSUS 1. The State of Jharkhand; 2. Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Ranchi; Jagarnathpur, District 3. Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Nepal House, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi; 4. Under Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, P.Ο. Dhurwa, P.S.- Jagarnathpur, District Ranchi; 5. Principal Secretary, Planning cum Finance, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, Ρ.Ο. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagarnathpur, District Ranchi; ..... Respondent(s) ……. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN ….… For the Petitioner(s) : M/s. Manoj Tandon, Siddharth Ranjan, Karamjit S. Chhabra, Shivani Bhardwaj, Shubham Kumar, Ankit Apurva, Advocates [In WPS No. 604/2021 & 363 of 2021] M/s. Saurabh Shekhar, Anurag Kumar, Dhruva Kumar, Advocates [In WPS Nos.4337/2020, 544/2021, 990/2021 & 2095/2021] Mr. Rohan Mazumdar, Advocate 2026:JHHC:15321 8 [In WPS No. 2129 of 2021] M/s. Ranjan Prasad Sinha, Sanjeev Thakur, Advocates [In WPS No.731 of 2021] For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Manish Kumar, Sr.S.C.-II Mr. Kunal Chandra Suman, A.C. to G.P.-II [In WPS No. 363 of 2021] Mrs. Sweta Shukla, A.C. to AAG-II [In WPS No. 544 of 2021] Mr. Bhanu Pratap, A.C. to G.A.-IV [In WPS No. 2095 of 2021] Mr. Anuj Burman, A.C. to G.A.-IV [In WPS No. 4337 of 2020] Mr. Shishir Suman, A.C. to AAG-IV [In WPS No. 2129 of 2021] Mr. Ranjan Kumar, A.C. to Sr.S.C.-I [In WPS No. 731 of 2021] Mr. Shubham Gautam, A.C. to AAG-V [In WPS No.990 of 2021] For the Acct. General : Mr. Sudarshan Srivastava, Advocate [In WPS No.2095 of 2021] Mr. Arvind Kumar Mehta, Advocate [In WPS No.544 of 2021] ….….. C.A.V. ON: 28/04/2026 PRONOUNCED ON:15 /05/2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. All these writ petitions raise identical questions of law and facts, as such, with consent of learned Counsel appearing for the parties; the same were heard together and are decided by this common judgment. The leading case is W.P.(s) No.604 of 2021 and the facts of this case would be sufficient to decide all these writ petitions filed under Article-226 of the Constitution of India. Background: 3. The petitioner in W.P.(S) No.604 of 2021 has prayed for quashing of Memo No.719 dated 20.02.2019, 2026:JHHC:15321 9 (Annexure-9 of the writ petition). Notification contained in Memo No.6621 dated 24.12.2020, (Annexure-10) is also under challenge. By these impugned decisions the respondent concerned has decided that the post of Assistant Engineer is not the ladder of promotion of Junior Engineer and hence the ACP/MACP benefits granted earlier were cancelled and it was held that the petitioners are entitled for 1st MACP in the scale of 15600-39100 with grade pay of 5400. 4. In terms of prayer no.(iii) of paragraph no.1, the Coordinate Bench of this Court has stayed the operation of impugned order dated 24.12.2020. 5. It has been pleaded that the petitioners were appointed as Junior Engineers in Water Resources Department. Petitioner No.1 was appointed on 28.01.1987 and Petitioner No.2 was appointed on 16.01.1987. Petitioner No.1 (Om Prakash Anand) was granted regular promotion from the post of Junior Engineer to the post of Assistant Engineer on 17.01.2002. 6. The Assured Career Progression (for short “ACP”) Scheme was framed by the State of Jharkhand on 14.08.2002. Petitioner No.2 (Arun Kumar) was granted regular promotion from the post of Junior Engineer to the 2026:JHHC:15321 10 post of Assistant Engineer on 21.06.2004. Finance Department of the State of Jharkhand issued a Resolution on 13.10.2005 to the effect that 1st and 2nd ACP would be granted to the Junior Engineers in pay scale of 6500-10500 and 10000-15200 respectively, as these were the scales of 1st and 2nd ladders of promotion of the Junior Engineers. 7. Modified Assured Career Progression (for short “MACP”) Scheme was also framed on 01.09.2009 which entitles a government servant three MACP benefits on completion of 10, 20 and 30 years of service respectively. Finance Department issued another Resolution on 12.08.2011 entitling the Junior Engineers in the scale of 6500-10500 on grant of 1st ACP and 10000-15200 on grant of 2nd MACP. 8. Jharkhand Subordinate Engineering Cadre Rules, 2013 was framed under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India and the same was notified on 16.01.2014; as per which the first ladder of promotion of Junior Engineers is on the post of Assistant Engineers. Petitioners were granted 2nd MACP benefits in the scale of 15600-39100 with grade pay of 5400. Petitioners were further granted 3rd MACP benefits in the scale of 15600- 39100 with grade pay of 6600 on 29.03.2017. However, 2026:JHHC:15321 11 the impugned order dated 29.02.2019 was issued cancelling such grant of ACP/MACP. Consequential notification also was issued on 24.12.2020, whereby the pay was refixed entitling the petitioners 1st ACP benefits in the scale of 15600-39100 only. Submissions of petitioners: 9. It has been submitted by Mr. Manoj Tandon, learned Counsel representing the petitioners in W.P.(S) No.604 of 2021 and W.P.(S) No.363 of 2021 that the action of the respondents in is highly arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional. He had submitted that both the impugned orders run contrary to law and hence the same deserve to be quashed and set aside. 10. He referred to Finance Department circular of Government of Jharkhand dated 13.10.2005, placed at Annexure-4 of the writ petition, as per which the 1st ACP benefit has to be granted in the scale of 6500-10500 and the 2nd ACP has to be granted in the scale of 10000- 15200. He has also referred another Finance Department circular dated 12.08.2011 by which the Government of Jharkhand decided to grant 1st and 2nd ACPs in the scale of 6500-10500 and 10000-15200 respectively as per the 1st and 2nd ladders of promotion. 11. It has also been submitted by the learned Counsel 2026:JHHC:15321 12 for petitioners that Jharkhand Subordinate Engineering Cadre Rules, 2013 (for short “2013 Rule”) was framed under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India. Rule 29 thereof unequivocally stipulates that Junior Engineers are entitled for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer. He, therefore, submits that Assistant Engineer is the 1st ladder of promotion of the Junior Engineers. It has also been submitted that considering all these Resolutions dated 13.10.2005 and 12.08.2011 read with Rule 29 of Jharkhand Subordinate Engineering Cadre Rules, 2013, it can be conclusively established that Assistant Engineer is the promotional post of Junior Engineers. 12. Mr. Tandon further submitted that the impugned orders are violative of the principles of audi alteram partem, as the decisions have been taken, detrimental to the interest of the petitioners, but without affording an opportunity of hearing. 13. Referring to the counter affidavit filed by respondent-State of Jharkhand, he submits that the State of Jharkhand has relied upon a decision of this Court dated 08.01.2018 passed in W.P. (s) No.5220 of 2007. This order was passed on the basis of a judgment of Patna High Court in the case of Krishna Kumar Sinha 2026:JHHC:15321 13 Vs. The State of Bihar and others (C.W.J.C. No.9098 of 2009); however, this judgment was rendered on 08.01.2018 on the basis of a judgment of Patna High Court which was already set aside on 11.02.2015 itself and the same was affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. 14. Learned Counsel further referred the order dated 29.09.2011 passed in Krishna Kumar Sinha (supra) which was set aside in L.P.A. No.1077 of 2012 by the Division Bench of Patna High Court on 11.02.2015 itself. This judgment of the Letters Patent Appeal dated 11.02.2015 was challenged by filing Special Leave to Appeal(c) No.21436 of 2015 but the same was dismissed on 07.07.2017 itself. The learned Counsel for the petitioners, therefore, submits that the State of Jharkhand has not applied its mind while passing the impugned orders. Such ground taken in the counter affidavit is a complete non application of mind. It was also submitted that the accrued rights of the petitioners cannot be taken away unilaterally in the manner, as has been done in the present case. 15. Mr. Saurav Shekhar, learned Counsel appearing in other writ petitions, while adopting the above arguments, 2026:JHHC:15321 14 further submits that there are Junior Engineers who were not promoted to the post of Assistant Engineers because of lack of educational qualification and as such they have been granted the benefits of 1st and 2nd ACPs in the scales for which Assistant Engineers and Executive Engineers are entitled to. Therefore, he submits additionally that there would be pay anomaly as there are Juniors who will get higher scales and the seniors would remain in a lower pay scale, if the impugned orders are allowed to stand. Submissions of State of Jharkhand: 16. Mr. Manish Kumar, learned Counsel appearing for the State of Jharkhand in all these cases defended the impugned orders. It has been submitted that the post of Assistant Engineer is the basic cadre post of State Engineering Service. He has also submitted that the respondents have rightly taken such decisions as the period would be counted from the date the petitioners have been appointed/promoted as Assistant Engineers. 17. It is the submission of the State that only some percentage of posts of Assistant Engineers are earmarked for promotion for Junior Engineers. Therefore, the post of Assistant Engineer cannot be treated as a promotional post of Junior Engineers. It was argued that Assistant 2026:JHHC:15321 15 Engineer is the post of Jharkhand Engineering Service Cadre, Group-B and it can be filled up by direct recruitment through competitive examination and by promotion of Junior Engineers, but the post of Assistant Engineer is not in hierarchy to the cadre of Jharkhand Subordinate Engineering Cadre Service. He, therefore, submitted that the writ petitions are fit to be dismissed as the impugned decisions have been taken in accordance with law. Analysis: 18. In view of the rival submissions of the learned Counsels appearing for the respective parties, this Court is of the view that the writ petitions deserve to be allowed for the following facts and reasons: - (a) Reference may be made to Finance Department Resolution dated 13.10.2005; whereby and whereunder the Finance Department, Government of Jharkhand has itself clarified that Junior Engineers shall be entitled for the pay scales of 6500-10500 and 10000-15200 on grant of 1st and 2nd ACPs. This resolution specifically deals with as to what scales the Junior Engineers are entitled to on grant of Assured Career Progression benefits. This has not been disputed by the respondents. (b) Facts of the case are not in dispute. Resolution 2026:JHHC:15321 16 No.1746/F was issued on 12.08.2011. The subject itself relates to grant of Assured Career Progression Scheme benefits to Junior Engineers in the scale of Assistant Engineers. This resolution has been issued by the order of the Governor. That means, the decision is of the State of Jharkhand. This resolution has clarified that Junior Engineers shall be entitled for the scale of 6500-10500 and 10000-15200 on grant of 1st and 2nd ACPs. This decision is binding on the State of Jharkhand. (c) Moreover, Jharkhand Subordinate Engineering Cadre (Junior Engineers, Civil/Electrical/Mechanical) Service Rules, 2013 has been framed by the State of Jharkhand in exercise of power conferred by proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India. This is in the shape of subordinate legislation. Rule 29 thereof reads thus:- ^29- duh; vfHk;ark] lgk;d vfHk;ark ds in ij fu;fer izksUufr gsrq ik= gksaxs ftl gsrq fu;r ÿितशत ,oa la[;k jkT; vfHk;a=.k lsok gsrq xfBr fu;ekoyh ds vuq:i gksxhA** On bare perusal of the aforesaid rule, it can be safely concluded that the post of Assistant Engineer is the promotional post of Junior Engineers. In other words, it can be securely held that the 1st promotional post of Junior Engineers is Assistant Engineer. 19. On perusal of Resolution dated 13.10.2005, Resolution dated 12.08.2011 read with the aforesaid 2026:JHHC:15321 17 2013 Rules, this Court holds that the post of Assistant Engineer is the promotional post of Junior Engineers. As such, the impugned decisions have been taken contrary to the aforesaid Rules/Resolutions, which are binding upon the respondents-authorities. 20. It appears that there is a complete non-application of mind by the respondents to hold by the impugned decisions that the Assistant Engineers is not the promotional post of Junior Engineers. 21. The reference of order dated 08.01.2018 passed in W.P.(S) No.5220 of 2007 is also misplaced. It has rightly been pointed out that the basis of such order is Krishna Kumar Sinha (supra) case which was set aside on 11.02.2015 itself by the Division Bench of Patna High Court in L.P.A. No.1077 of 2012, which was affirmed in Special Leave to Appeal (c) No.21436 of 2015 decided on 07.07.2017. 22. There is yet another ground not to accept submissions of the respondent State, inasmuch as, such ground is not taken in the impugned orders in the present case. What is not there in the impugned order cannot be supplemented by filing a counter affidavit that too on a non-est ground. Reference in this context may be made to the celebrated judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme 2026:JHHC:15321 18 Court of India in the case of Mohinder Singh Gill Vs. Chief Election Commissioner, reported in (1978) 1 SCC 405 wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court held that the public orders, publicly made, in exercise of a statutory authority cannot be construed in the light of explanations subsequently given by the officer making the order of what he meant, or of what was in his mind, or what he intended to do. Such orders are not like old wine becoming better as they grow older. The validity of such orders must be judged by the reasons so mentioned and cannot be supplemented by fresh reasons in the shape of affidavit or otherwise. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the ground taken by the respondents is absolutely misplaced. 23. One argument has been made by Mr. Saurabh Shekhar, learned counsel in some of the writ petitions that if the action of the Respondents will be accepted; the Junior Engineers who were not promoted to the post of Assistant Engineers may get higher pay scale than those who have been promoted to the post of Assistant Engineers and therefore there would be a pay anomaly. However, this Court is of the view that, the very ACP scheme dated 14.08.2002 stipulates that it is just the 2026:JHHC:15321 19 financial upgradation and the same has nothing to do with seniority and pay anomaly. This is just on completion of the required service period. Reference in this context may be made to paragraph no.3(XI) of the ACP scheme. This specifically stipulates that the ACP benefits are absolutely personal in nature which has nothing to do with the seniority. If a junior gets higher pay scale, the same would not be a ground for seniors to claim such benefit or pay protection. 24. The facts of the present case disclose that there are binding decisions of the State of Jharkhand in the shape of Resolutions/Rules which are either Executive Instruction or in the shape of Subordinate Legislation. The Officers of the State cannot take a contrary view of what has been decided by Resolutions dated 13.10.2005, 12.08.2011 and the Rules framed in 2013. It has already been held that the post of Assistant Engineers is the promotional post of Junior Engineers and hence the writ petitions deserve to be allowed. 25. Additionally, from the pleadings of the writ petition, which has not been controverted, this Court finds that the impugned decisions were taken unilaterally without issuance of even a show-cause notice upon the 2026:JHHC:15321 20 employees. The accrued rights of petitioners have been taken away in violation of the principles of audi alteram partem. The State-respondent has no unbridled power and jurisdiction to pass such impugned orders in the manner as has been done. Conclusion: 26. Having regard to the aforesaid discussions, all the writ petitions deserve to be allowed. Accordingly, Impugned orders/ decisions contained in Memo No.719 dated 20.02.2019 and Notification No.6621 dated 24.12.2020, are hereby, quashed and set aside, so far, they relate to one or the other writ petitioners in the respective writ petitions. The interim order dated 09.03.2021 passed in W.P.(S) No. 604 of 2021, is made absolute. 27. Consequently, all these writ applications stand allowed. Pending IAs, if any, are closed. No order as to costs. (Deepak Roshan, J.) Dated:15 /05/2026 Amardeep/ A.F.R Uploaded on 22.05.2026