IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2046 of 2009 ***** Ved Prakash Lal, Son of Shri Ganesh Prakash Lal, R/O Dujra, P.S. Budha Colony, District-Patna. …. …. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar through Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. Principal Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Government of Bihar, Vikash Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna 800 015. 3. Bihar State Agricultural Marketing Board (Dissolved) through its Administrator, Pant Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna – 800 001. 4. The Administrator, Bihar State Agricultural Marketing Board (Dissolved), Pant Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna – 800 001. 5. Secretary, Department of Urban Development and Housing, Government of Bihar, Patna. 6. Bihar State Housing Board through its Managing Director, Patna. …. …. Respondents ----------- 2. 11.2.2009. Petitioner is one of the employees of the erstwhile Bihar State Agricultural Marketing Board, which stands dissolved by a legislation but in terms of the provisions of the Act some of the employees at least have been accommodated in other departments of the State of Bihar. Petitioner is one of the fortunate ones because large number of other persons has lost their jobs in absence of any post being available for them for retention. The present writ application has been filed by the petitioner on the ground that by virtue of the assignment he is being relegated to a lower post and if he has an opening at the post which he held in the Marketing Board by being sent on deputation to the Housing Board, the authorities of the State should not come in the way. In the present writ application Annexure-5 dated 1.1.2009 passed by the Principal Secretary, Agriculture has rejected the request for deputation. Since the Marketing Board already stands dissolved and Agriculture Department is the nodal department but by virtue of assignment of the petitioner to the Building Construction Department he - 2 - has to first join the said department and then only the question of his going on deputation to any other department or authority may arise. The respondents have done no wrong in rejecting the claim for deputation but it will be open to the petitioner after joining the department to approach the concerned competent authority for considering his case for deputation to the Housing Board. The writ application is dismissed. Pawan/- (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)