IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1499 of 2010 IN CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE NO. 5991 of 2009 WITH INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO. 8493 of 2010 IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.1499 of 2010 =================================================== Ajay Shankar s/o late Ram Sakal Sinha, Mohalla Moldiar Tola, Village – Mokama, P.S. – Mokama, District – Patna, at present r/o Raghunathpath, R.P.S. More, New Baily Road, Patna … Appellant Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Department of Agriculture, Bihar, Patna 2. The Principal Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Department of Agriculture, Bihar, Patna 3. The Administrator, the Bihar State Agriculture Marketing Board (Repealed), Bihar, Patna 4. The Bihar State Electronics Development Corporation, through its Managing Director, Bihar State Electronic Development Corporation, Patna 5. The Secretary, Department of Industries, Govt. of Bihar, Patna ………… Respondents ================================================== APPEARANCE For the Appellant : Mr. Jai Prakash Verma, Advocate For the Respondent Nos. 1,2 & 5: Mr. Ranjit Sinha, Advocate For the Respondent no.4: Mr. Shivaji Pandey, Sr. Advocate Mr. B.N.Tiwary, Advocate For the Respondent no.5 : Mr. B.K.Singh, Advocate =================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE And HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 2 28/9/2010 IA. No.8493 of 2010 This application under section 5 of the Limitation Act is filed by the appellant for condonation of delay of 30 days occurred in filing the Letters Patent Appeal. 2 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the delay is condoned. Interlocutory Application stands disposed of. LPA. No.1499 of 2010 Heard the learned advocates. The appellant, an erstwhile employee of the respondent Bihar State Electronics Development Corporation (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Corporation’) has preferred this Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent against the judgment and order dated 14th July 2010 passed by the learned Single Judge in above CWJC. No.5991 of 2009. The appellant was appointed as Supervisor, Quality Control in the Corporation in January 1988. Since his appointment in the Corporation on 2nd August 1991, his service was transferred to the respondent Bihar State Agriculture Marketing Board (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Board’) on deputation. Since the deputation in the year 1991 to the Board, the appellant held the post of In-charge Market Secretary till he was repatriated to the parent Corporation on 15th September 2004. Feeling aggrieved by the order of repatriation, the appellant preferred appeal before the Board. The Board and the State Government in its Agriculture Department rejected the request of the appellant. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant approached this court under Article 226 of the Constitution in above CWJC. No.5991 of 2009. The learned Single Judge has, by the impugned judgment 3 and order dated 14th July 2010, rejected the writ petition. Therefore, the present Appeal. It may be noted that however long the service on deputation be, the appellant did not have a right to continue on deputation for ever nor was he ever absorbed in the service of the Board. The challenge to the order of repatriation, in our view, was not maintainable. Besides, we are informed that the Board has been dissolved since 1st September 2006. We see no merit in the challenge to the order of repatriation made by the appellant. The learned Single Judge has rightly rejected the writ petition. No case for interference is made out. The Appeal is dismissed in limine. Neyaz/ ( R. M. Doshit,CJ.) (Jyoti Saran, J.)