JUDGMENT : ANANDA SEN, J. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for grant of his annual increment which according to the petitioner is due w.e.f 23.07.2010 till the date of his retirement i.e. 30.04.2017. He has also prays that the consequential monetary benefit should also be granted to the petitioner. 2. The facts are admitted in this case. The petitioner was appointed as a Junior Engineer in 1980 in Public Works Department, Patna, Bihar. The petitioner superannuated on 03.04.2017 as Assistant Engineer, N.R.E.P, Lohardaga. It is the case of the petitioner that his annual increment for the period mentioned above has not been paid on the ground that he has not passed the two papers in departmental examination. 3. He submits the he had already filed a representation to exempt him since he had attained the age of 50 years and had tried his level best and has also attempted to pass the examination, but he could not. 4. The respondents in their counter affidavit has also taken the stand that the petitioner has not passed the departmental examination thus he was found unfit to get the annual increment. Further he submits that the petitioner as a matter of right cannot claim exemption from passing the departmental examination. 5. After considering the submissions of the parties, I find that admittedly the petitioner did not pass the departmental examination. There is a provision to give relaxation. As per clause-22 of the Notification dated 12.04.2016 contained in Memo No. 2377(s), a person can be exempted from appearing in the departmental examination if he is more than 50 years and if his services is otherwise satisfactory and there is sufficient evidence that he sat and tried to pass the said examination. It is also an admitted fact that the petitioner had represented to exempt him.Admittedly no order has been passed in the said representation. 6. When there is a clause to exempt an employee from passing departmental examination on attaining 50 years, subject to the provision mentioned therein, and when the petitioner has made a representation seeking exemption, the respondents ought to have considered the representation of the petitioner and should have passed an order on the said representation. In the event the petitioner is exempted he was entitled to get the benefit of increments. In the event the petitioner is exempted he was entitled to get the benefit of increments. Thus it was incumbent upon the respondents to first decide the representation of the petitioner before coming to a conclusion that the petitioner is not entitled for the increments. 7. Since his representation was not decided during his service tenure, I direct the Secretary, Road Construction Department to take a decision on the representation of the petitioner and decide as to whether the petitioner can be exempted from passing the departmental examination. This decision must be taken within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. If it is decided to exempt the petitioner, then all the financial benefits accruing due to grant of the increments should be paid to the petitioner within four weeks thereafter. If the respondent- Authorities decide not to grant exemption, a detailed reasoned order should be communicated to the petitioner within the aforesaid period. 8. This writ petition, thus, stands disposed of.