AJIT KUMAR HEMBRAM Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE issues involved in all the three appeals are the same and as such they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) C .W.J.C. No. 709 Of 2000, out of which L.P.A. No. 710 of 2000 arises, C.W.J.C. No. 710 of 2000, out of which L.P.A. No. 652 of 2000 arises and C.W.J.C. No. 986 of 2000, out of which L.P.A. No. 651 of 2000 arises, were filed by the appellants for quashing the order dated 6.1.2000 issued under the signature of the Director, Administration -cum -Deputy Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Government of Bihar, taking back the services of the appellants from the Bihar State Agriculture Marketing Board (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board '), where they were posted as Market Secretary, to their parent department i.e. the Agriculture Department on the substantive posts of Inspector, Weights and Measures and also for a direct on to the respondents to issue notification promoting them to the post of Market Secretary in the Board from the year 1990 when their services were transferred to the Board for the purposes of their absorption in terms of the Government policy.

(3.) THE admitted facts are that all the appellants belong to Bihar State Subordinate Agriculture Service, Category -8. Prior to the creation of the Board, the Marketing Wing, Category -8 In the Agriculture Department was looking after the function of marketing. After creation of the Board, its function was entrusted by the statutory provision to it. The Government of Bihar issued a notification in the year 1973 to the effect that all the Gazetted and Non -Gazetted employees of the Agriculture Department intending to join the services of the Board should exercise their option and, thereafter, their services shall be absorbed in the Board. It was further provided therein that those, who would not exercise their option, would be treated as Government employees on deputation in the Board. The services of many employees were put at the disposal of the Board. Some of them even exercised their option for absorption of their services but the matter of absorption could not be materialised for one reason or the other and such employees sent to the Board superannuated as the State Government employees. The State Government by resolution dated 27.1.1988 took a decision that the persons, whose services were deputed in the Board, would not be absorbed in the service of the Board unless they exercised their option to opt the services of the Board. It was also provided therein that on their superannuation, the department would not depute any other person in the Board. Clause -3 of the aforesaid resolution provided, inter alia, that the posts lying vacant in the Board, including that of the Market Secretary, would be filled up from the Weights and Measure Inspectors working in Category -8 of the Department of Agriculture. They would be asked to exercise their option and in case of exercising their option, they would be absorbed in the service of the Board and their lien with the Government would stand terminated. However, the State Government would be liable to pay pension for the period they remained in the Government service.