IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5459 of 2010 1. JAI GOVIND RAM S/O LATE RAMDHARI RAM R/O VILLAGE - RAMPUR BHIKHANPURA, P.S - SAHEBGANJ, DISTRICT - MUZAFFARPUR. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND FISHERIES, GOVT. OF BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA 3. THE DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND FISHERIES, GOVT. OF BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA 4. THE JOINT SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND FISHERIES, GOVT. OF BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA ----------- 2/ 25/11/2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The writ application appears to be raising purely issues of administration not involving adjudication of any legal issues at this stage. It is therefore considered appropriate to dispose it off by the present order without a counter affidavit. The petitioner is stated to have been transferred on 4th of April, 1986 from Katoria in the district of Bhagalpur to Patrahatu in the district of Gumla. He was relieved on 16.4.1986. His joining at Gumla was not accepted on 18.4.1986 on the ground that there was no sanctioned post for Class-1 Dispensary. The petitioner claims to have then submitted his representation and joining to the Director, a Husbandry at the Head Quarters on 21.4.1986 with a request to allot him a suitable posting. On 25.6.1987 a fresh notification was issued by which he was transferred - 2 - to the Mobile Touring Veterinary Office, Kalyanpur, district- East Champaran. It is his case that this notification showed his place of posting as Katoria and not Gumla. The petitioner joined at East Champaran on 31.7.2008. In controversy is his salary for the period ’16.4.1986 to 30.6.1987’. The respondents by an order dated 23.12.2009 have adjusted the period in between 16.4.1986 to 30.6.1987 against earned leave. The only issue for consideration is that if the period in question relates only to the point of time when the petitioner went to join at Gumla, his joining was not accepted and he reported at the Head Quarters at Patna leading to fresh posting at East Champaran, and obviously the fault lies with the respondents themselves and the petitioner cannot be denied salary. Alternatively, if there are any other issues, there is no occasion for the Court to make any pronouncements at this stage in view of the impugned order dated 23.12.2009 being non- speaking in nature hindering judicial review. The order dated 23.12.2009 is set aside and the matter is remanded to the respondents to pass a fresh reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law within a maximum period of three months from the date of receipt/presentation of a copy of this order. Needless to state that if the respondents find - 3 - justification in the claim or in any part of the claim, necessary consequential orders shall be passed within the same period. The writ application stands disposed. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)