IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7732 of 2005 Anil Kumar, S/o Shri Triveni Sah, resident of village- Piyunibag, near Siramandir, Bettiah, P.O. and P.S.- Bettiah, Distt. West Champaran, presently posted as Plant Protection Inspector in the office of Junior Plant Protection Officer, Muzaffarpur. ... Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar, through the Chief Secretary, Old Secretariat, Patna. 2. Secretary, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, Govt. of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna. 3. The Finance Commissioner, Govt. of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna. 4. The Agriculture Production Commissioner, Department of Agriculture, Govt. of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna. 5. The Director, Department of Agriculture, Govt. of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna. 6. The Deputy Director (Administration), Department of Agriculture, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 7. The State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary, Jharkhand at Ranchi. 8. The Secretary, Department of Agriculture and Sugar Cane, Govt. of Jharkhand at Ranchi. 9. The Director of Agriculture, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi. 10. The Chairman, the State Advisory Committee, Bailey Road, Patna. 11. Ravi Ranjan Pd. Keshri, S/o not known to the petitioner, Junior Plant Protection Officer, Rohtas at Sasaram. 12. Shri Krishna Singh, S/o not known to the petitioner, Junior Plant Protection Officer, Nalanda at Biharsharif. 13. Prabhat Kumar, S/o not known to the petitioner, Survallance Officer, Plant Protection Officer, Mithapur Agriculture Farm at Patna. 14. Prem Prakash Singh, S/o not known to the petitioner, Assistant Director of Agriculture, Plant Protection at Hazaribagh. .... Respondents. ----------- 2 02- 20.4.2009 Heard Mr. Vijay Kumar Mukul for the petitioner, Mr. Kumar Alok, learned Standing Counsel No.19 for the State of Bihar and its functionaries, and Mr. Dhruba Mukherjee for the State of Jharkhand and its functionaries. There were three streams of services in the Agriculture Department of the undivided State of Bihar, namely, Plant Protection Inspector, Pests and Disease Reporter, and Surveillance Inspector. The petitioner belongs to the cadre of Plant Protection Inspector. The three were merged into one to constitute one cadre of Plant Protection Inspector. The petitioner raises a grievance before this Court that he has lost his seniority after the merger, and he is losing promotions in favour of persons junior to him. 2. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. Learned counsel for the respondents is right in his submission that the order was passed on 18.2.1992, whereas the petitioner joined as Plant Protection Inspector on 23.6.1999. The issue of merger was settled much before the petitioner’s entry into service. The petitioner has, therefore, no Locus Standi to challenge 3 the decision of merger and the principles attendant on it. That apart, learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to point out any infirmity in principles which govern determination of seniority after the merger took place. Learned counsel for the respondents has rightly relied on the decision of a learned Single Judge of this Court in Bihar Rajya Koshagar Avam Lekha Pratiniyukta Karamchari Sangh and others vs. The State of Bihar and others, reported in 2007 (1) P.L.J.R. 31, paragraph-22 of which is reproduced hereinbelow for the facility of quick reference. “22. For the said reason I hold that the petitioners cannot challenge the decision of the Government with respect to the reorganisation of the cadre and post taken prior to their entry into Government service. Hence, the challenge to the said resolution is held as not maintainable on behalf of the petitioners and it is accordingly rejected.” 3. The writ petition is dismissed. (S K Katriar, J.) S.K.Pathak/