IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.17718 of 2010 KISHUNDEO PRASAD, SON OF LATE- SUDESHWAR YADAV, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- MASHAURHI KALA, P.S. PALIGANJ, DISTRICT- PATNA. …. PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS DEPARTMENT, OLD SECRETARIAT, BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, OLD SECRETARIAT, BIHAR, PATNA. 4. THE AGRICUSDLTURE PRODUCTION COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICUSLTURE, NEW SECRETARIAT, BIHAR, PATNA. 5. THE JOINT SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICUSLTURE, NEW SECRETARIAT, BIHAR, PATNA. 6. THE ADMINISTRATOR, BIHAR STATE AGRICULTURE MARKLETING BOARD (ABOLISHED) PANT BHAWAN, BAILY ROAD, PATNA. 7. THE SECRETARY, BIHAR STATE AGRICULTURE MARKETING BOARD (ABOLISHED) PANT BHAWAN, BAILY ROAD, PATNA. … RESPONDENTS. ----------- 5. 16.11.2010. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, State and the counsel for the Bihar State Agriculture Marketing Board (hereinafter referred to as the “Board”). 2. Petitioner served as a Class-IV employee of the Board on daily wage basis. He is aggrieved by the order dated 17.3.2010, Annexure-3 passed by the administrator whereunder his employment with the Board has been terminated with reference to the provisions contained in Section 25FFF(1) of the 2 Industrial Distputes Act. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that aforesaid order of termination is contrary to Section-6 of the Bihar Agriculture Produce Market (Repeal) Act, 2006(hereinafter referred to as the “Repeal Act”) as before terminating his services the case of the petitioner was not considered by the Committee Secretaries constituted in terms of sub-section (ii) of Section 6 of the Repeal Act. To verify the aforesaid position the matter has been adjourned from time to time but statement of the petitioner that his case has not been considered by the committee of Secretaries in terms of Section 6 of the Repeal Act has not been disputed by the authorities. In the circumstances, I proceed on the basis that the order terminating the services of the petitioner dated 17.3.2010, Annexure-3 is violative of Section 6 of the Repeal Act and is, accordingly, set aside for the reasons indicated in the order dated 27.8.2010 passed in C.W.J.C. No.12641 of 2010 and other analogous matter with direction to the committee of secretaries to consider the case of the petitioner in accordance with Section 6 of the Repeal Act. 3. The writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. Ibrar/-/ ( V. N. Sinha, J.)