PRAKASH CHANDRA SINHA ETC Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Bihar Reorganization Act, 2000 brought in its wake the problem of cadre division in various services, including the All India Service in the undivided State of Bihar. In view of the bifurcation of the State the cadres had to be divided and separate allotment made in the reoganized State of Bihar and the State of Jharkhand. As per Section 72(2) of the Bihar Reorganization Act, 2000, as soon as may be after the appointed day, the Central Government had to determine by special or general order, the successor State to which every person, who immediately before the appointed day, was serving in connection with the affairs of the State of Bihar, the final allotment for service and the date with effect from which such allotment was to take effect. The appointed day was 15.11.2000, when the separate States came into existence. As regards the State Civil Services and the State Police Service, the Central Government made the final allocation by way of notifications dated 26.4.2003 and 22.4.2003 respectively. Various writ petitions were filed essentially by persons disappointed at not being allotted to the State of Jharkhand. They challenged the notification on the ground that the cadre division was violative of Section 75 of the Reorganization Act, 2000, was arbitrary and unfair. The learned Single Judge called upon the Union of India, the State of Jharkhand and the State of Bihar to answer three questions which he thought arose for consideration. They are, - -

(2.) THE learned Single Judge also referred the writ petition to a Division Bench for decision. He also directed that status -quo be maintained in respect of those in service who were to retire within one year of his order. He clarified it by saying that if any of the petitioners was at present working in the State of Jharkhand and was to retire by 31.5.2004, he/she should not be relieved to join the successor State of Bihar. Subsequent to the reference to the Division Bench, counter affidavits and supplementary counter affidavits were filed on behalf of the State of Bihar, the Union of India and the State Advisory Committee entrusted with recommending the cadre division.

(3.) DURING the course of hearing and in the light of the contentions raised, we directed the Union Government and the State Advisory Committee to produce all the relevant flies before us for scrutiny. The relevant files were produced for our perusal. A supplementary affidavit was also filed on behalf of the Advisory Committee setting out the steps taken by the Committee and setting out the manner in which they went about completing the cadre division. Further arguments were also heard based on the supplementary counter affidavit filed by the State Adivsory Committee and only thereafter the hearing was concluded.