IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.899 of 2011 In CWJC No. 3942 of 2011 ====================================================== Ranbir Prasad, S/o Late Krishna Deo Sahu, R/o Village-Rasoolpur, P.O.- Jandaha, P.S.-Jandaha, District-Vaishali. At present residing at Satpura Road, Aghoriya Chowk, District-Muzaffarpur (Bihar). .... .... Appellant/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Agriculture Produce Commissioner, Department of Agriculture, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. The Director, Agriculture, Department of Agriculture, Government of Bihar, Patna. 5. The Deputy Director, Administration, Department of Agriculture, Government of Bihar, Patna 6. The District Agriculture Officer, Sitamarhi, District-Sitamarhi. 7. The State Advisory Committee, Bihar, Patna. 8. The Principal Secretary, Home (Special) Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 9. The Deputy Secretary, Home (Special) Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. B.K.Sinha and Mr. Ramesh Kumar, Advocates. For the Respondent/s : Mr. T.B.Singh, AAG-7 Ms. S.Priya Pathak, AC to AAG-7. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 3 29-06-2011 This Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent is preferred by the appellant-writ petitioner against the order dated 19th April 2011 passed by the learned single Judge in above C.W.J.C. No. 3942 of 2011. The appellant, a Block Agriculture Officer in the State of Bihar filed above CWJC No. 3942 of 2011 under Article Patna High Court LPA No.899 of 2011 (3) dt.29-06-2011 2 226 of the Constitution to challenge the legality of the order dated 18th October 2010 made by the Director of Agriculture, Bihar. The said order was made by the Director of Agriculture, Bihar in compliance with the order dated 20th August 2010 of the Government of India made under the powers conferred upon it by the Bihar State Reorganization Act, 2000. By the said order, on reorganization of the State of Bihar, the service of the appellant has been allocated to the State of Jharkhand. The challenge to the said order before the learned Single Judge has been rejected. Therefore, the present Appeal. Learned Counsel Mr. B.K.Sinha has appeared for the appellant. He candidly admits that the impugned order of allocation has been made by the Director of Agriculture pursuant to the order made by the Government of India. The Government of India was, therefore, a necessary party to the writ petition, but the Government of India was not impleaded as party respondent to the writ petition. He has further submitted that the appellant is at the fag end of the service; his claim for compensation against the State of Bihar for accidental injury suffered by him in discharge of duty is also pending. In case, he is now called upon to join the State of Jharkhand, he will suffer immense prejudice. We are of the view that the appellant has not made out any case that the impugned order of allocation of the appellant to the State of Jharkhand under the Bihar State Re-organization Act, 2000 is in any manner illegal. Moreover, the writ petition suffered from the vice of non-joinder of necessary party. The petition was, therefore, liable to be dismissed on that ground alone. In the event the appellant has personal difficulty, the only remedy to the appellant would be a representation to the Patna High Court LPA No.899 of 2011 (3) dt.29-06-2011 3 Government of India. The legality of the order of allocation cannot be challenged on account of personal difficulty. For the aforesaid reasons, the Appeal is dismissed in limine. Sujit/- (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)