JUDGMENT : Pramath Patnaik, J. In the captioned writ application, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for issuance of writ of certiorari for quashing the order dated 25.07.2009 (Annexure-6) passed by respondent no.1 disallowing exemption from passing departmental Accounts Examination after retirement from service and for declaration that Rule 157(3)(J) of Bihar (now Jharkhand) Board Miscellaneous Rule 1958 cannot be insisted as a condition precedent for grant of ACP (Assured Career Progression) in the notification dated 14.08.2002 as the same is not a rule for promotion of Account Clerk nor there is any other Rule requiring passing of examination for promotion. The petitioner has further prayed for grant of 2nd Time Bound Promotion i.e. 2 Senior Selection Grade with effect from 26.07.2002 i.e. after completion of 25 years of service or in the alternative grant 2nd ACP with effect from 26.07.2001 on completion of 24 years of the service and the petitioner has further prayed for direction to respondent no.2 for grant of full Pension, Leave, Salary, Gratuity etc. on the basis of last pay drawn which comes to be 2nd equivalent on grant of Time Bound Promotion with effect from 26.07.2002 in view of decision of this Court dated 11.12.1995 vide Annexure-2. 2. The facts as disclosed in the writ application is that the petitioner was promoted from Class-IV to Class-III in the year 1977 and joined the post of lower Divisional Clerk. Subsequently, post of lower Divisional Clerk was merged with Upper Divisional Clerk. Since then, the petitioner had been working as Accounts Clerk till the date of his retirement i.e. 31.07.2009. It has been averred in the writ application that the petitioner has passed the Departmental Examination (Hindi noting and Drafting Examination) in the year, 1981. The petitioner has been granted 1st time Bound promotion with effect from 26.07.1987 and the same has been verified by District Account Officer in the year 1990 and he became entitled for second time bound promotion with effect from 26.07.2002. The Circular of the State Government dated 15.05.1992 granting exemption to those Accounts Clerk who had crossed 50 years and had appeared thrice in the examination but could not pass. It has further been averred in the writ application that Rule 157 (3) (J) of Bihar (now Jharkhand) Board Miscellaneous Rule has been struck down by the Hon'ble Patna High Court in C.W.J.C No.42 of 1989 (R). It has further been averred in the writ application that Rule 157 (3) (J) of Bihar (now Jharkhand) Board Miscellaneous Rule has been struck down by the Hon'ble Patna High Court in C.W.J.C No.42 of 1989 (R). It has further been submitted that in the wake of adoption of Central pay scale, the State of Jharkhand issued a notification to give benefit of 2nd ACP(Assured Career Promotion) by the Central Government a type of time bound scale enhancement on completion of 12 and 24 years of services. The petitioner has been granted benefit of only one ACP though completed more than 24 years service by an order dated 21.06.2003 on the ground that he had been promoted from grade IV, though in the Accounts Cadre he was not granted a single promotion during the span of last 32 years of service in that cadre. The petitioner applied for exemption i.e. application dated 05.06.2009 with affidavit which was forwarded to the Commissioner South Chotanagpur Division with recommendation of the concerned authority verifying the fact that no examination was held for recent past 5 years prior to his retirement. The application of the petitioner was forwarded to the Commissioner South Chotanagpur Division Ranchi through proper channel by the Superintending Engineer Rural Works Department Work Circle Ranchi vide letter dated 03.07.2009 and the Commissioner South Chotanagpur arbitrarily rejected application/recommendation for exemption vide letter dated 25.07.2009 as per Annexure-7 of the writ application. Being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 25.07.2009 vide Annexure-7 to the writ application, the petitioner left with no other alternative, efficacious and speedy remedy, has approached this Court invoking extra-ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal of his grievances. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner during course of hearing has strenuously urged that after attaining the age of 50 years, there was no requirement as per the Government Circular to appear the examination. Moreover, for the several years the departmental examination was not held. Therefore, the rejection of the application of the petitioner vide Annexure-7 is per se illegal. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the respondent ought not to have insisted upon passing Accounts Examination for grant of ACP. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the respondent is bound to fix the pension on the basis of last pay drawn under Rule 252 of the Jharkhand Pension Rules. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the respondent ought not to have insisted upon passing Accounts Examination for grant of ACP. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the respondent is bound to fix the pension on the basis of last pay drawn under Rule 252 of the Jharkhand Pension Rules. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the recommendation in respect of petitioner vide Annexure-8 to the writ application would clearly reveal as per the circular of the Government dated 15.05.1992 the petitioner having crossed the age of 50 years, is exempted from appearing for the examination. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to 2nd Time Bound Promotion on completion of 24 years of service the Accounts Clerk i.e. 25.07.2002. 4. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents repelling the averments made in the writ application. In the counter-affidavit, it has been inter alia submitted that Assured Career Promotion (ACP) is granted to the employees subject to the approval of the competent authority within one year after granting of ACP and the period is 12/24 years. It has been submitted that initially the petitioner was appointed as Peon, Grade-'D' thereafter he was promoted to Junior Accounts Clerk which was bearing higher pay scale than previous pay scale of Grade-'D'. Under the circumstances he was granted only one A.C.P. i.e. after completion of 24 years of undisrupted service with approval of the competent authority within one year. It has further been submitted that the Accounts examination was conducted by the Jharkhand Revenue Board preceding 5 years of the retirement of the petitioner. It has further been submitted that the circular letter dated 15.05.1992 the exemption from passing of Accounts examination is optional not compulsory. Learned J.C to S.C (L & C) for the respondents-State has vociferously defended the action of the respondents. Learned counsel for the respondents-State has submitted that since the petitioner has not passed the departmental examination, he is not entitled to get the ACP benefits. The ground of rejection of the application by the Commissioner, South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi is that being an Accounts Clerk, the petitioner has not passed the Accounts examination which is essential requirement for efficiency. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent no.3 has not controverted the factual averments made in the writ application. The ground of rejection of the application by the Commissioner, South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi is that being an Accounts Clerk, the petitioner has not passed the Accounts examination which is essential requirement for efficiency. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent no.3 has not controverted the factual averments made in the writ application. Learned counsel for the respondent no.3 during course of hearing has referred to letter dated 26.04.2010 of the office of the Accountant General where discrepancy has been found in the petitioner's case. Therefore, after rectification of discrepancy, the Accountant General processed the same for revised pension. 6. After bestowing my anxious consideration to the submissions made at the Bar and on perusal of the relevant records, I am of the considered view that the petitioner has been able to make out a case for interference due to the following grounds:- (I) In the case in hand, the petitioner from the date of promotion to Class-III posts in the year 1977 rendered 32 years of uninterrupted services i.e. till the date of retirement i.e. 31.07.2009. During his continuous service, the petitioner has been granted 1st time bound promotion with effect from 26.07.1987 and the petitioner became entitled for second time bound promotion with effect from 26.07.2002. Moreover, as per the Government circular letter dated 15.05.1992, the petitioner is entitled to exemption from appearing in the Accounts examination on the ground that he has crossed the age of 50 years on the date of his eligibility. Moreover, during the span of last 32 years of service in the Accounts cadre, the petitioner has not been granted single promotion. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to avail the second time bound promotion with effect from 26.07.2002 after completion of 25 years of services or in the alternative 2nd ACP with effect from 26.07.2001 on completion of 24 years of service. On perusal of the impugned order dated 25.07.2009, it would appear that the same has been passed without taking note of the Government circular dated 15.05.1992 vide Annexure-3. 7. On perusal of the impugned order dated 25.07.2009, it would appear that the same has been passed without taking note of the Government circular dated 15.05.1992 vide Annexure-3. 7. As logical sequitur to the aforesaid reasons, the impugned order dated 25.07.2009 vide Annexure-7 warrants interference by this Court, accordingly the same is quashed and set aside and the matter is remitted to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of 2nd Time Bound Promotion with effect from 26.07.2002 i.e. after completion of 25 years of service or grant of 2nd ACP with effect from 26.07.2001 on completion of 24 years of services and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/communication of a copy of this order. 8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands allowed.