IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.1102 of 2011 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 13100 of 2010 ====================================================== 1. Anil Kumar S/O Sri Gajadhar Prasad, R/O Vill.- Lalganj Kharjama, P.O.+P.S.- Chandi, Distt.- Nalanda, Presently Posted as Assistant Project Engineer, in Bihar State Pul Nirman Nigam, Road Division, Patna .... .... Appellant/s Versus 1. The Union Of India, through the Ministry Of Personnel and Public Complaints and Pension Personnel and Training Department Govt. Of India, New Delhi, through the Secretary 2. The Chairman, State Advisory Committee, Bihar, Irrigation House, Patna 3. Deputy Secretary, State Advisory Committee, Bihar, Irrigation House, Patna 4. The Commissioner-Cum-Secretary, Department Of Personnel & Administrative Reforms, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 5. The Secretary, Road Construction Department, Govt. Of Bihar, Vishveshwariya Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna 6. The Deputy Secretary, Road Construction Department, Govt. Of Bihar, Vishveshwaraiya Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna 7. The State Of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary, Road Construction Department, Govt. Of Jharkhand, Ranchi Respondents.... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Mukul Sinha, Advocate. For Union of India : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Tiwary, Advocate. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Satyavrat Verma, Advocate for Jharkhand State. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA Patna High Court LPA No.1102 of 2011 (2) dt.08-09-2011 2 ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 2 08-09-2011 Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 21st June 2011 passed by the learned single Judge in above C.W.J.C. No. 13100 of 2010 the writ petitioner has preferred the present Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent. The appellant, an Assistant Engineer in the service of the then State of Bihar, has challenged the action of the State Government in allocating the service of the appellant to the State of Jharkhand in accordance with the option exercised by him earlier, but contrary to the later option exercised by the appellant. Learned single Judge has considered the grievance of the appellant and found that the appellant did not exercise second option within the prescribed time. Besides, no policy decision was brought on the record indicating that in the matter of allocation to the State of Bihar or to the State of Jharkhand, the senior persons should be given preference. The appellant has been allocated to the State of Jharkhand since 2009. We see no reason to interfere with the order of the learned single Judge. Appeal is dismissed in limine. BTiwary/- (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)