SHAMIM Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application has been filed for quashing the order dated 21.12.2002 whereby the service of the petitioner has been returned to his parent organisation, i.e., Bihar State Agriculture Development Corporation. Further prayer made by the petitioner is to quash the consequential order dated 3.1.2002 whereby the petitioner has been relieved to join at the parent organisation. Further prayer of the petitioner is for a direction to absorb him in the service under the State Agriculture Marketing Board and for grant of revised pay scale.

(2.) SHORT facts giving rise to the present application are that the petitioner was initially appointed as Accounts Assistant in the Bihar State Agro Industries Development Corporation, hereinafter referred to as the Corporation w.e.f. from 16.1.1970. The Corporation incurred heavy loss in the year 1981 -82 and the Chief Secretary of the State in order to mitigate the hardship of the employees of the Corporation, by letter dated 24th of May, 1984 (Annexure -4) addressed to all the Secretaries of the State Government and Managing Directors of the Corporation, directed that againstthe sanctioned vacant posts, no direct recruitment be made and the surplus employees of the Corporation be considered. The Additional Secretary to the Government in the department of Agriculture, by its teleprinter message dated 25.7.1984 (Annexure -5), referred to the letter of the Chief Secretary dated 24.5.1984 and directed the Managing Director of various Corporations including the Bihar State Agriculture Marketing Board, hereinafter referred to as the Board, to fill up the vacant posts from the surplus employees of the Corporation. In pursuance of the aforesaid decision, by order dated 24.11.1987, petitioner as also one Bishwanath Chandra were deputed to work as Accountants in Board and while doing so, it was made clear that they shall not be entitled to any deputation allowance. In the light of the aforesaid order, petitioner as also aforesaid Bishwanath Chandra were relieved by the Corporation by its memo dated 22.12.1987 (Annexure - 6/1). Petitioner thereafter joined as Accountant in the Board on 22.12.1987. The Board, by its order dated 2.2.1998 (Annexure -7), granted him the scale of pay of the Accountant w.e.f. 22.12.1987. By order dated 7.2.1990 (Annexure -8), petitioner was given time bound promotion w. e.f. 16.1.1980 in the scale of pay of Rs. 850 -1360.

(3.) IT is the stand of the petitioner that the Corporation is virtually non -existent and sending the petitioner back to the Corporation, in sum and substance, will lead to termination from service. It has been pointed out that appointment of the petitioner on deputation is not a case of ordinary deputation but adjustment of the surplus employees of the Corporation and as such, his service ought not to have been returned to the Corporation. It has also been pointed out that Bishwanath Chandra, who was also appointed on deputation basis, like the petitioner and is junior to the petitioner, has been retained whereas the petitioner has been sent back to the parent department.