AJAY SHANKAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner, the State, Bihar State Agriculture Marketing Board (Dissolved) (hereinafter referred to as the Board) and the counsel for the Bihar State Electronic Development Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation).

(2.) Petitioner having qualification of MBA was appointed as a Supervisor (Quality Control/Marketing Executive) in the Corporation and at the relevant time served the Board on deputation has challenged the order dated 29.9.2008, Annexure-8 passed by the Administrator of the Board, whereunder request of the Petitioner to absorb him in the service of the Board with reference to the resolution of the Board dated 20.10.2001, Annexure-10 has been rejected on the ground that the Board having been dissolved under the provisions of the Bihar Agriculture Produce Market (Repeal) Act, 2008 (sic--2006?) (hereinafter referred to as the Repealing Act) his services cannot be absorbed in the Board. The services of the Petitioner was repatriated to his parent organization under instruction dated 15.9.2004, Annexure-7 with direction that he shall be relieved from the service of the Board with effect from 30.10.2004. Perusal of the instruction dated 15.9.2004, Annexure-7 indicates that the same has been issued in the light of the resolution of the Board dated 4.12.1999, whereunder it was resolved to repatriate all the deputationist serving in the Board who have continued in the Board for more than three years.

(3.) Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the order dated 15.9.2004, Annexure-7 is contrary to the subsequent resolution of the Board dated 20.10.2001, Annexure-10, whereunder it is resolved to continue Market Secretary serving the Board on deputation possessing MBA qualification until regular appointment is made by the Board on the vacant post of Market Secretary. The resolution was communicated to all concerned under Memo No. 4829 dated 29.10.2001 and highlighting the aforesaid resolution of the Board Petitioner challenged the order of the Managing Director of the Board contained in letter dated 15.9.2004, Annexure-7 before the Managing Director itself by filing miscellaneous case on 28.10.2004, copy of the miscellaneous case is contained in Annexure-11 to the supplementary affidavit filed by the Petitioner today. It is also submitted on behalf of the Petitioner that aforesaid miscellaneous case was kept pending by the Managing Director until the Board was dissolved under the provisions of the Repealing Act, whereafter the Administrator of the Board numbered the miscellaneous case as Appeal Case No. 8 of 2006 and disposed of the same under the impugned order dated 29.9.2008, Annexure-8 holding that in view of the provisions of the Repealing Act, the employees of the Board and the Marketing Committee(s) can only be absorbed in the Agriculture Department, Petitioner being the employee of the Corporation his case cannot be considered for absorption in the Agriculture Department.