ORDER 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State in both the writ applications. The questions for consideration being common they are being disposed by this common order. 2. The Petitioners holding the post of Accounts Clerk are aggrieved by the order dated 30.8.2011 passed by the Principal Secretary, Department of Finance, Government of Bihar, Patna, declining to give them first A.C.P. in the basic grade pay of Accounts Officer. 3. The petitioners came to the Court earlier, reported in 2011(3) PLJR 474 ( Shashi Shekhar Ambasta and another Vs. The State of Bihar and Ors.). The discussion at para-8 is as follows :- “8. There has to be difference between a substantive promotion and grant of ACP. The latter does not result in the benefit of higher post carrying a higher pay scale. It is basically an anti-stagnation measure to uplift the sagging spirit of an employee who may not have had an avenue of promotion or may have failed to secure promotion. A person may remain a Accounts Clerk throughout his life either for reason of lack of avenue for promotion of for having failed to qualify in the examination for promotion as Accounts Officer. To put at par the issue of grant of ACP with grant of promotion by requiring passing of the limited competitive examination for both purposes may prove counter productive to the entire scheme of ACP. If he clears the examination he gets promotion to higher post and he does not require ACP. If he does not clear the examination he stagnates and requires ACP. Yet it is denied because he did not pass the examination. The amendment made on 21.8.2008 (sic-28.1.2008 ?) in the ACP Scheme visualises that if there is avenue for promotion from one cadre to another then the basic of the pay scale of the promotional cadre post is available as ACP. There is no rider incorporated in it for clearing any examination much less any other process for promotion to the next higher post in the next cadre. To this Court, the amendment is clear in its language and only visualises that the next higher post in the next cadre is an avenue for promotion.” 4. Learned counsel for the State submits that the order of the Principal Secretary, is well considered and reasoned. To this Court, the amendment is clear in its language and only visualises that the next higher post in the next cadre is an avenue for promotion.” 4. Learned counsel for the State submits that the order of the Principal Secretary, is well considered and reasoned. The post of Accounts Officer was not a routine avenue of promotion from the post of Accounts Clerk. They were two different cadres. A person who completed ten years as Accounts Clerk becomes eligible to sit in the limited competitive examination. If he passes, it was an appointment on the post of Accounts Officer in another cadre by way of promotion. The limited competitive examination was an open competitive selection. It shall be deemed to be a direct appointment on the post of Accounts Officer. The period of service rendered earlier will not be counted for the purpose of ACP on the promotional post. The promotions under the Bihar Junior Revenue Service Cadre Rules 2004 (hereinafter called the „Revenue Rules?) are different. No analogy can be drawn from the same. 50% posts are to be filled up by promotion on the recommendation of Departmental Promotion Committee but without any competitive examination. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that all aspects have been considered at para-8 of the earlier judgment. The post of Accounts Officer is the next promotion avenue for Accounts Clerk. There is a 25% quota reserved for promotion of Accounts Clerk. 6. On the earlier occasion it was noticed that grant of ACP was an anti-stagnation measure for those who may not have avenues for promotion or failed to pass the examination and secure promotion. To put a substantive promotion to the post of Accounts Officer and for obtaining an ACP at par by requiring passing of the limited competitive examination for both purposes may prove counter productive to the entire scheme of ACP. The amendment made on 21.8.2008 contains no rider as suggested by the respondents. 7. The distinction sought to be made in the impugned order with regard to grant of ACP under the Revenue Rules in the basic grade of Anchal Inspector- cum- Kanoongo to those holding the post of Revenue Karamchari does not appeal to the Court. The post of Anchal Inspector-cum-Kanoongo is also a promotional avenue outside the cadre for 50% quota reserved for Revenue Karamchari. The post of Anchal Inspector-cum-Kanoongo is also a promotional avenue outside the cadre for 50% quota reserved for Revenue Karamchari. The examination for confirmation on the post of Revenue Karmachari whereafter the candidate may become eligible for the higher post is similar to the ten years requirement to be fulfilled by Accounts Clerk before he can sit for the limited competitive examination. The promotion as Anchal Inspector-cum-Kanoongo is not routine and as a matter of course. It is dependent upon selection to be made by the selection committee. Rejection is inherent in the procedure. A person not selected by the Departmental Promotion Committee and one who fails to clear an examination for promotion, constitute one category for purposes of grant of ACP. The distinction urged between consideration by the committee under the Revenue Rules and an examination to be passed by the petitioners is not germane and frivolous in nature. 8. The fact that there is an eligibility requirement for ten years as Accounts clerk before he becomes eligible to sit at the limited competitive examination for promotion to Accounts Officer does not detract from the factual position that it is a promotional avenue. The significance of a separate quota cannot be lost sight of or ignored and it is importance undermined. 9. It may be clarified that an Accounts Clerk cannot lay out a claim for ACP in the basic scale of Accounts Officer till he first fulfils the qualification of ten years of service as an Accounts Clerk. The channel for promotion to Accounts officer opens only thereafter. The order dated 30.8.2011 is set aside. 10. The petitioners are held entitled to be considered for grant of ACP in the basic grade of Accounts officer. The order be complied with within a maximum period of four months. 11. The writ applications are allowed.