SAHNAZ BEGUM Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sarva Deo Singh, Counsel appearing for the State Advisory Committee. The State Counsel and Mr. Dhrub Mukherjee, counsel appearing for the State of Jharkhand are also present.

(2.) THIS is a matter relating to cadre division following the bifurcation of the State. The petitioner was posted at Gogri block in the district of Khagaria as Urdu Typist under the Rajbhasha Department. On the basis of the recommendation of the State Advisory Committee, the Central Government allocated her service to the State of Jharkhand. Aggrieved by the allocation order, she came before this Court. This case was heard earlier on a number of dates and on 10.7.2006, the Court passed an order taking note of the facts and circumstances in light of which the allocation of the petitioner 's service to Jharkhand appeared quite unreasonable and hard. Accordingly, the Court directed the State Advisory Committee to reconsider the case of the petitioner taking into consideration the material facts and circumstances. In pursuance of the direction of the Court, the Advisory Committee reviewed the petitioner 'scase and the Chairman of the Committee passed a detailed order under his Memo No. 486, dated 28.7.2006. The order was brought on record alongwith a supplementary counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Committee. According to the order, the working strength of Urdu Typists was 394, out of which 319 belonged to the unreserved category. Out of the employees in the unreserved category, the division between Bihar & Jharkhand was to be made in the ratio of 213: 106. In paragraph 9, the order gives the details of how the quota for the State of Bihar was filled up. It is stated that in the first instance, 22 employees were allocated to Bihar on special considerations. For the remaining 191 posts, there were 149 options for this State and all the optees were accommodated as per their options. That left 42 posts for which there were no options and they were filled up on the basis of seniority. Thus, all 213 posts got filled up at Serial No. 120 in the seniority list. The name of the petitioner figured at Serial No. 351 of the seniority list and that is why, she could not come to Bihar and was sent to Jharkhand.

(3.) ON the previous date, Mr. Sarva Deo Singh was asked to explain the special considerations under which the first 22 employees were allocated to this State. Today, Mr. Singh explained that the special category comprised employees (i) who were due to retire within two years from 15.11.2000, (ii) whose spouses were in employment in this State and who (the spouse) for any reason could not be transferred to Jharkhand, (iii) who were handicapped (iv) ladies etc.