IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.931 of 2008 ------- 1. The Commissioner-cum-Chairman, K.B.C., CADA, Bhagalpur. 2. The Secretary, K.B.C. CADA, Bhagalpur. Respondents-- Appellants Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Department of Water Resources Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Deputy Secretary, Department of Water Resources, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. The ManagingDirector, K.B.C. CADA, Bhagalpur. Respondents / Respondents. 5. Arun Kumar Sinha son of Late Jaldhari Prasad Sinha, resident of Mohalla Lalu Chak, P.O. Issak Chak, P.S. Bhagalpur, District Bhagalpur. Writ petitioner—Respondent. ----------- For the appellants : Dr. Krishna Nandan Singh, Senior Advocate Dr. Kamal Deo Sharma, Advocate ------- P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal -------- Dated, the 27th November, 2008. The appeal suffers from delay of 32 days. Even if we condone the delay in filing the appeal, we are of the view that the appeal does not deserve to be admitted. 2. The senior counsel for the appellants submitted and, in our view, fairly, that pursuant to the resolution dated 1st June, 1983, - 2 - Bihar Service Code has been made applicable to its employees. He further submits that no separate service rules/regulations have been framed by Kiul-Badua-Chandan, Command Area Development Agency (for short, „Agency‟) for its employees. He also does not dispute that the State government amended Rule 73 of the Bihar Service Code by enhancing superannuation age of its employees from 58 years to 60 years from 24th March, 2005. If that be so, the amended Rule 73 of Bihar Service Code became applicable to the employees of the Agency with effect from 24th March, 2005 itself since the Agency has applied the provisions of Bihar Service Code to its employees and no separate service rules were framed by it. The senior counsel, however, invited our attention to the order passed by us on 22nd July, 2008 in L.P.A. No. 767 of 2007 (Anirudh Prasad Vs. The State of Bihar and ors) in support of the submission that the enhanced age of retirement from 58 years to 60 years for the employees of the Agency became effective from 30th March, 2007. 3. The order dated 22nd July, 2008 in the case of Anirudh Prasad reads thus: “We heard the counsel for the appellant. 2. The Board of Directors of Sone Command Area Development Agency took the decision that the enhanced age of retirement from fifty eight years to sixty years will be effective from 16th April, 2007. The said decision cannot be said to suffer from any legal infirmity nor can it be said to be arbitrary. 3. In this view of the matter, dismissal of the writ petition by the Single Judge cannot be faulted. L.P.A. is dismissed in limine.” - 3 - 4. From the aforesaid brief order, the facts in the case of Anirudh Prasad are not clear. What appears from the order is that the Board of Directors took a decision that the enhanced age of retirement from 58 years to 60 years will be effective from 16th April, 2007. This decision was not found faulted by us. How could the brief order passed by us in the case of Anirudh Prasad be treated as precedent in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 5. Appeal does not deserve to be admitted. It is dismissed in limine. This disposes of I.A. No. 6964 of 2008 as well. R. M. Lodha, CJ Kishore K. Mandal, J. Anil/