IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2740 of 2007 Amar Nath Yadav, Son of Late Girija Prasad Yadav Resident of Naya Tola, Kazipur, Police Station- Kadam Kuan, District- Patna, presently working as Sample Taker in the office of Senior Research Officer, PHED, Public Health Institute, Chhazubagh, Patna ….. Petitioner Versus 1. The Union Of India through Secretary Personnel, Pension Department, New Delhi 2. The Deputy Secretary (S.R.), Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievance and Pension, Personnel and Training Department, Government of India, New Delhi 3. The Chairman, State Advisory Committee, Bailey Road, Patna 4. The Secretary, State Advisory Committee, Bailey Road, Patna 5. The Secretary, Public Health and Engineering Department, Nirman Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna 6. The Chief Engineer, (Mechanical) Public Health and Engineering Department, Nirman Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna 7. The Senior Research Officer, Public Health and Engineering Department, Public Health Institute, Chhazubaghm, Patna …. …. Respondents ---------------------------------- 04/ 30.08.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the Union of India. 2. This writ petition was filed assailing the order of the Union of India (Department of Personnel and Training, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievance and Pension) dated 25.1.2007, Annexure-8 whereby petitioner and others serving in the Public Health Engineering Department of the United State of 2 Bihar prior to its bifurcation under the Bihar Re- organization Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) have been allocated to the State of Jharkhand in the light of the provisions of the Act. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that while allocating the petitioner to Jharkhand State under the impugned order dated 25.1.2007, Annexure-8, the authorities of the State as also the Union of India did not notice the promotion granted to the petitioner on the post of Sample Taker under order dated 12.8.2004, Annexure-5, as the impugned allocation order dated 25.1.2007, Annexure-8 proceeds on the basis that petitioner is serving on the post of Laboratory Attendant. 4. Submissions noted above was made before this Court on 2.4.2007 and this Court under order dated 2.4.2007 asked the counsel for the Union of India to seek instruction in the matter and in the meantime observed that the directions contained in order dated 25.1.2007, Annexure-8 to the writ petition pertaining to the petitioner be ignored. 5. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner 3 that in the light of the aforesaid interim order dated 2.4.2007, petitioner has been allowed to continue in the bifurcated State of Bihar. 6. From the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Union of India, statement has been made that the allocation of the personnel between the two States has been made in the light of the principles evolved for the purpose. Counter affidavit, however, does not indicate that while allocating the petitioner to the State of Jharkhand, promotion granted to him on the post of Sample Taker was taken note of. 7. In the circumstances, I direct the petitioner to make representation before the competent authority of the Union of India through its Controlling authority. The Controlling authority is directed to forward the representation of the petitioner to the competent authority of the Union of India so as to enable the competent authority of the Union of India to take note of the fact that before allocating the petitioner to Jharkhand State under the impugned order dated 25.1.2007, Annexure-8, he stood promoted on the post of Sample Taker under 4 order dated 12.8.2004, Annexure-5, which according to the petitioner is solitary post. 8. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. 9. It goes without saying that in the representation made by the petitioner, petitioner is at liberty to refer to any other circular which has application in the matter and is advantageous to him. It is expected that the competent authority of the Union of India shall dispose of the representation of the petitioner within a reasonable time of its receipt from the competent authority of the State. Arjun/ ( V. N. Sinha, J.)