LAWS(PAT)-1984-9-8

DHIRENDRA KUMAR AKELA Vs. BIHAR STATE AGRICULTURE

Decided On September 04, 1984
DHIRENDRA KUMAR AKELA Appellant
V/S
BIHAR STATE AGRICULTURE MARKETING BOARD Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether, the power to transfer an employee of one Market Committee to another within the State, expressly conferred on the Bihar State Agricultural Marketing Board by Rule 64 (ii)(c) of the Bihar Agricultural Produce Markets Rules, 1975, is ultra vires of the parent Act-has come to be the primarily significant question in this set of three writ petitions, now referred for an authoritative decision by a Full Bench. Equally at issue is that correctnema of the earlier Division Bench decision in Krishna Kumar Shrivastava v. The State Agricultural Marketing Board and Ors. 1984 Labour and Industrial Cases 931.

(2.) The representative matrix of facts may be taken from Dhirendra Kumar Akela v. The Bihar State Agriculture Marketing Board and Ors. Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 884 of 1983. The petitioner therein was appointed as a Typist by the Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Dinapore, on the 21st of April, 1979, and, it is averred on his behalf that thereafter he is continuing to perform his duties satisfactorily. However, by the impugned order dated the 14th January, 1983 (Annexure '1'), the Secretary of the Bihar State Agricultural Marketing Board (hereinafter referred to as the Board), directed the transfer of the petitioner's services from the Dinapore Market Committee to the Arrah Market Committee. The gravamen of the petitioner's case is that he was an employee of the Dinapore Agricultural Produce Market Committee, which is a statutory body, and, there is no power or authority in the Board to transfer the petitioner's services to a different statutory body, like that of the Arrah Agricultural Produce Market Committee. On these premises the impugned order of transfer is sought to be assailed as wholly illegal and without jurisdiction.

(3.) In the return filed on behalf of Respondents Nos. 2 and 3, the stand taken is that though under the Bihar Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1960 (hereinafter called the Act), each Market Committee is a corporate body, yet it is wholly subservient and subordinate to the Board, which is the apex body at State level. It is stated that the very purpose of the establishment of the Board under Section 33A of the Act is to exercise stringent superintendence and control over the Market Committees throughout the State. A reference is made to the various provisions of the Act and the Rules framed thereunder to highlight the fact that the functioning of the Market Committees including the service conditions of their staff and the employees is wholly under the control of the Board and consequently under the express powers conferred by Rule 64 (ii)(c) of the Rules, those employees are transferable from one Market Committee to another.