CHANDRAMAUFI AGRAWAL Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER , an employee of Bihar State Sugar Corporation, was posted at Samastipur. The said Sugar Corporation has stopped its operations. While it stopped its operations, it did not discharge its employees, nor did it take any step to discharge the petitioner. It, however stopped paying the salaries payable to the petitioner. On the basis of the orders passed by the Hon ble Supreme Court, salaries payable to the petitioner for the period 1992 -1997 were paid. Nine per cent of the salaries payable to the petitioner for the period 1997 -2003 have been paid. Remaining 91% have not been paid. By the order dated 4th June, 2007, the petitioner has been transferred from Samastipur to the Headquarters of the Corporation at Patna. The learned counsel for the Corporation has accepted that it is not in a position to release 91% of the salaries of the petitioner for the period 1997 -2003 not it is in a position to release salaries of the petitioner lor the period subsequent thereto. At the same time she has also accepted the position that the Corporation is not in a position to provide for an accommodation of the petitioner at Patna where he can reside for the purpose of reporting to his duties on the transferred post.

(2.) IN such circumstances the one and the only conclusion would be that the impugned transfer order dated 4th June, 2007 transferring the petitioner to Patna is an order to put the petitioner in greater difficulty. Such an order is not sustainable in the eye of law. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned transfer order dated 4th June, 2007 is quashed.

(3.) THERE is a dispute whether the petitioner is the General - Manager or the Cane Manager. This dispute is not the subject matter of the writ petition and accordingly I have not applied my mind in relation to it.