INDRADEO PASWAN Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 31.1.2006 passed in W.P. (S) No. 445 of 2006 whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition holding that the notification dated February 24, 2005 by which the Central Government allocated the successor State of Bihar to the petitioner needs no interference.

(2.) Mrs. Seema All Khan, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, assailed the impugned judgment on the ground that the learned Single Judge has not considered the fact that the conditions of services of the appellant is being changed to his disadvantage inasmuch as he has been reverted back and his pay scale is being reduced by allocating the services of the appellant in the State of Bihar. Learned counsel further submitted that the appellant is the senior most person drawing the highest scale of pay in the entire mining cadre and there is no other candidate in both the States posted in equivalent scale/ post. The grievance of the appellant is that his objection has not been properly considered by the Advisory Committee.

(3.) From perusal of the counter affidavit of the State Advisory Committee set up by the Central Government, it appears that the total sanctioned strength in the cadre of Deputy Director (Mines) was 11 While apportioning the sanctioned strength field posts are divided in the same ratio as they were sanctioned in the undivided Bihar for areas falling in each of the successor Station. Finally the sanctioned strength of 11 was apportioned as 6 and 5 between Bihar and Jharkhand respectively. The appellant, who was in the cadre of Deputy Director, was given cadre on the basis of status prevailing immediately before the appointed day. Before the tentative list was finalized, objections were called for and after considering the objections, final notification was issued. In the said premises, in our view, the learned Single Judge following, the decision of this Court in the case of Prakash Chandra Sinha and Others Vs. Union of India and others. 2003 (4) JCR 165 and Priya Barata Narain Singh Vs. Union of India and others. 2006 (1) JCR 69 (Jhr) : 2006 (1) JLJR 45. rightly held that the final notification of cadre allocation needs no interference by this Court. Moreover, the learned Single Judge also gave liberty to the petitioner to bring the matter to the notice of the competent authority at the time of his posting if he has any grievance.