MOZAFFAR IMAM KHAN Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) PETITIONERS of both the writ applications were working under Gandak Command Area Development Agency, Muzaffarpur. Eleven Petitioners in C.W. J.C. No. 9129 of 2006 were working as Treasure Guard, whereas two Petitioners in C.W. J.C. No. 8555 of 2006 were working as Soil Sampler. They have challenged the communication dated 5th April, 2006 (Annexure -12/1) issued by the Under Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar by virtue of which authorities under Gandak Command Area Development Agency were directed to remove the Petitioners from service. Petitioners have also challenged the consequential order dated 9th May, 2006 (Annexure -15) by virtue of which the Petitioners have been terminated.

(3.) AS per Sec. 4 of the Act a Board is set up for administration and control of each Command Area and it is headed bya Chairman.The Chairman and the Managing Director of the Board are to be appointed by the State Government. There are various other nominees to the Executive Committee and majority of these nominees are holders of civil posts in the Government. In terms of the Act, the Agencies under Sec.39 have been granted powers to make Rule and Regulation with prior approval of the State Government but in the knowledge of the Petitioners no such Rule or Regulation was ever made or brought into effect. In fact, the service conditions of the State government was made applicable as majority of the employees belonged to Agriculture Department and the Agency was under supervision and control of the Department of Agriculture, Government of Bihar.