Satyendra Narayan Roy and Others vs The Union of India and Others

V.N. Sinha, J.—Heard learned counsel for the parties. Petitioners, who are employees of the Bihar State Agriculture Marketing Board (in short "the Board") and at the relevant time were serving in the Market Committee/ Works Division and other field offices, have filed these writ petitions questioning the validity and correctness of the office order dated 3.12.2005, whereunder they have been permanently allocated to the Jharkhand State Agriculture Marketing Board.

Correctness and validity of other similar order was challenged in this Court on similar grounds as taken in these writ petitions by filing C.W.J.C No. 15240 of 2005 (Shukdeo Prasad & Anr. vs. The Union of India & Ors.), which was allowed under orders dated 7.2.2006 and the order dated 3.12.2005 was quashed holding that the petitioners of the said case who served in the Market Committee/field offices of Bihar State Agriculture Marketing Board could not have been allocated to the Jharkhand State Agriculture Marketing Board. The aforesaid order of this Court dated 7.2.2006 has already been affirmed under orders dated 31.3.2006, passed in L.P.A. No. 225 of 2006. These writ petitions are also allowed in the same terms as contained in aforesaid order dated 7.2.2006, passed in C.W.J.C. No. 15240 of 2005 and the order dated 3.12.2005 allocating these petitioners to the Jharkhand State Agriculture Marketing Board is quashed.

The petitioners shall continue to hold their posts in the Bihar State Agriculture Marketing Board in different Market Committees or wherever they were serving on the date of passing of the impugned order dated 3.12.2005.

The impugned order having been quashed it goes without saying that the petitioners will continue to serve on their respective posts on which they were serving at the time of issue of impugned order. The writ petitions are, accordingly, allowed. No cost.