IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16609 of 2009 1. Bhuneshwar Mahto S/o Late Lurak Mahto, resident of village Sakhiyalalpur Chauk, P.S. Sadar, Hazaribagh, District Hazaribagh 2. Kailash Nath Pandey S/o Late Nazir Pandey, resident of village Matwari Bhuiya Toli, Mor, P.S. Sadar, Hazaribagh, District Hazaribagh Versus 1. The Bihar State Forest Development Corporation through its Managing Director, 13, Patliputra Colony, Patna-13 2. The Managing Director, Bihar State Forest Development Corporation 13, Patliputra Colony, Patna-13 3. The Jharkhand State Forest Development Corporation through its Managing Director, Main Road, Hinoo Ranchi 4. The Managing Director, Jharkhand State Forest Development Corporation, Main Road, Hinoo Ranchi 5. The General Manager, Minor Forest Produce Project Circle Hazaribagh, District Hazaribagh 6. The Divisional Manager, Minor Forest Produce Project Circle Hazaribagh, District Hazaribagh 02/ 01.12.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the Bihar State Forest Development Forest Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation). 2. Petitioners have assailed the orders, bearing Letter Nos. 187 dated 7.3.2009 and 311 dated 14.2.2009, as contained in Annexures-1 and 2 to this writ application, whereunder they have been directed to superannuate by the Divisional Manager, Minor Forest Produce Project Division, Hazaribagh on attaining the age of 58 years. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the said order is in teeth of the order of the Patna High Court, whereunder the retirement age of the employees of the Corporation has been extended to 60 years and petitioners being on deputation in the Minor Forest Produce Project Division, Hazaribagh, the authorities should have allowed them to continue in the service until they reach the age of 60 - 2 - years. 4. Aforesaid orders dated 7.3.2009 and 14.2.2009, Annexures-1 and 2 superannuating the petitioners have been passed by the authority at Hazaribagh, which is within the State of Jharkhand. In the circumstances, in the opinion of this Court, the said impugned orders should have been assailed by filing writ application before the Jharkhand High Court and not before this Court. 5. This writ application is, accordingly, dismissed. Arjun/ (V.N. Sinha, J.)